Battles of Saratoga Preservation and
Viewshed Protection Plan
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Old Saratoga on the Hudson Region, New York
Prepared by:
Saratoga P.L.A.N.
with
Dodson Associates, Ltd.
December 2007
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
December 2007
Old Saratoga on the Hudson Region, New York
For comments and more information, contact:
Saratoga P.L.A.N.
Preserving Land and Nature
102 Spring Street, Room 202
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
(518) 587-5554
www.saratogaplan.org
This material is based upon work assisted by a grant from the Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, American Battlefield Protection Program (GA-2255-05008). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this
material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
Department of the Interior.
Cover photograph: Dodson Associates, Ltd.
463 Main Street, PO Box 160
Ashfield, MA 01330
(413) 628-4496
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Table of Contents
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction ....................................................................................... 1
1.1. Purpose ...................................................................................... 2
1.2. Planning Process........................................................................ 2
1.3. Timeline...................................................................................... 3
2. Historical Significance....................................................................... 5
2.1. Background ................................................................................ 5
2.2. First Battle (The Battle of Freeman Farm) .................................. 6
2.3. Second Battle (The Battle of Bemis Heights) ............................. 7
2.4. Siege .......................................................................................... 9
2.5. Surrender ................................................................................... 10
3. Context ............................................................................................. 13
3.1. Location and Geographical Area ................................................ 13
3.2. History of Preservation Efforts.................................................... 13
3.3. Community Characteristics......................................................... 16
3.4. Current Land Uses and Regulations........................................... 18
4. Preservation Priorities....................................................................... 23
4.1. Town of Easton .......................................................................... 26
4.2. Town of Greenwich..................................................................... 27
4.3. Town of Northumberland ............................................................ 27
4.4. Town of Saratoga ....................................................................... 28
4.5. Village of Schuylerville................................................................ 28
4.6. Town of Stillwater ....................................................................... 29
4.7. Village of Victory......................................................................... 29
5. Voluntary Preservation Tools ............................................................ 31
5.1. Fee Interest ................................................................................ 31
5.2. Conservation Easement ............................................................. 32
5.3. Lease-to-Purchase Contracts..................................................... 33
5.4. Purchase of Development Rights ............................................... 33
5.5. Voluntary Transfer of Development Rights................................. 34
6. Regulatory and Incentive Tools ........................................................ 37
6.1. Comprehensive Planning ........................................................... 37
6.2. Land Use Regulations and Zoning ............................................. 37
6.3. Designate as Critical Environmental Area .................................. 43
6.4. Historic Preservation .................................................................. 43
6.5. New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA).... 45
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
7. Implementation Strategy ................................................................... 47
7.1. Regional Implementation............................................................ 47
7.2. Local Implementation ................................................................. 49
7.3. Funding of Implementation ......................................................... 54
8. Recommended Actions..................................................................... 57
9. Potential Partners and Funding and Assistance Sources ................. 65
9.1. County Government ................................................................... 65
9.2. State Government ...................................................................... 65
9.3. Federal Government................................................................... 72
9.4. Non-profits.................................................................................. 76
9.5. Other Sources ............................................................................ 80
10. Bibliography ...................................................................................... 81
Appendices
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix F:
Appendix G:
Appendix H:
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan Phase 1:
Historic and Scenic Resource Inventory and Analysis and Mapping;
Dodson Associates, Ltd.
Saratoga National Historical Park Viewshed Analysis; LA Group
Graphic Representation of Conventional and Conservation Development
and Transfer of Development Rights; Dodson Associates, Ltd.
Model Ordinances
Easton Land Use Mapping
Greenwich Land Use Mapping
Stillwater Land Use Mapping
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
1.0
Introduction
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Old Saratoga region was the location of the Battles of Saratoga, internationally
acknowledged for its impact on the history of the United States and the world as the
“turning point of the Revolution” in 1777. Within its boundaries are historically significant
battlefield and battle related sites including: the Field of Grounded Arms where the
British Army surrendered to American forces after the Battles of Saratoga, the General
Philip Schuyler House and the Saratoga Monument, a 155-foot tall granite obelisk, that
is within the 18th-century British lines of defense in the Village of Victory.
The Saratoga Monument overlooks the grounds where Burgoyne had his last camp,
where the decision was made to surrender the British army and beyond. The
monument was intentionally situated on its high bluff (at the time of construction it was
known as the Heights of Saratoga) to afford not only a view of the final British camp
(from whose ashes the monument to victory literally arises) but to also include sweeping
views of the surrounding region. At the time of construction the 19th century landscape
was much less inhabited with mature trees than today. The view from the top then
encompassed broad views of the Hudson Valley within which so many of the events
associated with the battles occurred.
The Battles of Saratoga and the
landscape of the battlefield grounds
continue to have a profound influence
on the character of the communities
that surround it. The rural countryside
that surrounds much of the historic
battlefield
retains
the
cultural
landscape much as it existed 200
years ago. The surroundings have
enabled residents and visitors alike to
truly appreciate and understand the
significance of the Battles of Saratoga
that are among the most decisive
battles in world history.
Saratoga National Historical Park
Photo credit: Dodson Associates, Ltd.
The Revolutionary War history of the region is distinguished by the protection of the
Saratoga National Historical Park but much of the surrounding contextual landscape is
under threat. Today, the region is seeing escalating growth and with it a tangible threat
to the cultural and historical interpretation of the battles.
The identification and
assessment of significant historic resources related to the battles, seige and surrender
at Saratoga, as well as critical scenic resources, is the first step in their long-term
preservation and protection.
1
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
1.1
Purpose
The Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan is taking place
under the Old Saratoga on the Hudson program. The Old Saratoga on the Hudson
program is an ambitious effort to revitalize one of the most historic and scenic areas in
upstate New York. Historic buildings, working farms and orchards, sweeping mountain
views, the Hudson River, the Old Champlain Canal and The Saratoga National
Historical Park are just a few of the unique features of the area.
The Plan seeks to protect historic sites associated with the Battles of Saratoga, beyond
the Saratoga National Historical Park’s (SNHP) borders, and preserve the viewshed and
cultural landscape of this significant area while fostering economically sustainable
development. The Plan prioritizes parcels within the seven municipalities involved in
the process according to historic, viewshed and scenic values according to recognized
standards. For a complete discussion of the methodology of the inventory and analysis,
see the Phase One Report, attached as Appendix A hereto. The Plan then outlines the
tools by which each municipality could protect the resources within its borders as well
as potential funding sources to accomplish preservation. Each community will need to
assess its current status, its own priorities for preservation and the tools most
compatible with its long-term goals and objectives.
1.2
Planning Process
The process was managed by and the final plan was prepared by Saratoga PLAN,
Preserving Land and Nature and the Historic and Scenic Resources Inventory was
conducted by Dodson Associates, LTD., under a grant from the American Battlefields
Protection Program, a National Park Service (NPS) program to assist communities.
The Plan was guided by a Steering Committee of representatives from The Towns of
Saratoga, Northumberland, Greenwich, Easton and Stillwater and the Villages of Victory
and Schuylerville; historians from each of the communities; NPS; and members of each
community. In addition to acting as a Steering Committee member, NPS, through staff
and resources at the Saratoga National Historical Park, provided data, reports,
photographs, historical information and a wide range of additional resources to guide
the development of this inventory and plan.
In Phase 1, Dodson Associates conducted an in-depth inventory and assessment
process, mapping and visual analysis using Geographic Information System technology
and a public participation process. Through this approach, priority resources were
identified and an analysis was prepared that provided the basis for the creation of a
community-based Preservation Plan for the ultimate protection of the unique and
culturally important scenic and historic resources of the region. For complete
discussion of Dodson’s methodology, please see the Phase One report in Appendix A.
Additionally, an assessment of the threats to the viewshed of the Saratoga National
2
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Historical Park was completed and updated previously by the LA Group and informed
this Plan. The LA Group’s reports are included as Appendix B. In Phase 2, based on
current land use regulations in each of the seven municipalities in which these priorities
are found and preservation tools available in New York State, Saratoga County and
each individual municipality, preservation strategy were developed for the different
resources.
1.3
Timeline
2/06
Complete consultant selection process
6/1/06
Completion of Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection
Plan Fact Sheet
6/15/06
Introductory Steering Committee Meeting
6/15/06
Completion of Work Plan with ABPP and consultant
7/18/06
First public meeting to introduce the project, review process for inventory
review, review process for assessment and analysis, explain guidelines for
treatment options and present sample protection criteria.
10/19/06
Second public meeting to discuss Phase 1 of the project, the Historic and
Scenic Resource Inventory and Analysis and present rankings and
mapping.
11/6/06
Conducted Image Poll
11/20/06
Meeting with Steering Committee and Town and County Historians to
review Phase 1 of the project, the Historic and Scenic Resource Inventory
and Analysis and present rankings and mapping and to discuss necessary
modification.
12/06
Completion of Phase 1 Report
1/12/07
Meeting with National Park Service and NYS Assemblymember Englebright
to present Phase 1.
6/07
Complete revisions to Phase 1 Report and mapping
6/07
Submission of Draft Plan to ABPP and NPS staff for review and comment
10/18/07
Distribution of Draft Plan to Committee Members
11/8/07
Close of Committee Draft Plan Review
3
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
12/07
Complete creation of individual municipality mapping
12/07
Final Draft prepared for submission
4
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
2.0
Historical Significance
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Many historians consider the Battles of Saratoga the major turning point of the
American Revolution. The battles and subsequent surrender by Major General
Burgoyne proved to the world that the fledgling American army was an effective fighting
force capable of defeating the highly trained British forces in a major confrontation. As a
result, the European powers, particularly the French, took interest in the cause of the
Americans and began to support them.
2.1 Background
In the British Campaign of 1777, Major General Burgoyne
planned a concentric advance of three columns to meet in
Albany, New York. He led the main column, which moved
southward along the Hudson River from Canada. A second
column under General Barry St. Leger served as a
diversionary attack, moving eastward from Canada along the
Mohawk River. General Howe was expected to direct the third
element of the attack. According to the plan, General Henry
Clinton, under the direction of Howe, would move northward
along the Hudson River and link up with Burgoyne in Albany.
Through this campaign, the British hoped to isolate and
destroy the Continental forces of New England, by controlling
Portrait of Major General John
Burgoyne by Sir Joshua
Reynolds, Now in the Frick
Collection, NYC
5
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
the Hudson River Valley and cleaving New England from the rest of the colonies.
Initially, the British plan appeared to be working, with British
victories at Ticonderoga and Hubbardton. Burgoyne's army
continually pushed back the Americans southward along the
Hudson River with only minor casualties. In an attempt to
slow the British advance, the American General Philip
Schuyler detached 1000 men under the command of Major
General Benedict Arnold. This force moved west to thwart
St. Leger's eastward advance along the Mohawk River.
Arnold returned with his detachment after repelling St. Leger
in time to serve in the Battles of Saratoga.
Portrait of General Philip
Schuyler by Jacob H. Lazarus
(1822-91) in 1881, from a
miniature painted by John
Trumbull about 1792.
Burgoyne's progress toward Albany had slowed to a crawl
by late July, and his army's supplies began to dwindle.
Burgoyne sent a detachment of about 800 troops under the
command of the Lieutenant Colonel Friedrich Baum from
Fort Miller to Bennington. On August 13, 1777, en route to
Bennington, Baum learned of the arrival in the area of 1,500 New Hampshire militiamen
under the command of General John Stark. The resulting Battle of Bennington on
August 16, 1777, marked the first significant American victory of the campaign against
Burgoyne.
2.2 First Battle (The Battle of Freeman Farm)
On September 13 and 14, 1777, Burgoyne crossed to the west side of the Hudson with
his whole army and encamped on the heights of Saratoga. On September 15, 1777, he
marched his army slowly down the five miles to Dovegat where he stayed two days for
the purpose of repairing the roads and bridges in his advance, and of sending out
scouts to reconnoiter the enemy. Strangely, it is said that no enemy was discovered.
Burgoyne at this time seemed to know nothing about the position or the numbers of the
American forces, but went on marching blindly through the woods in search of an
enemy supposed to be somewhere in the forest before him. On the morning of
September 17, 1777, Burgoyne himself headed a scouting-party, and proceeded as far
as Sword's House, which was within four miles of the American lines, encamped his
whole army there during the 18th, and until the morning of the 19th.
On the east side of the river, a few miles to the east of the armies stood Willard's
Mountain. From the top of this mountain American scouts had full view of both armies.
On September 19, 1777 the Royal army advanced upon the American camp in three
separate columns. Two of them headed through the heavy forests covering the region;
the third, composed of German troops, marched down the river road. American scouts
on Willard Mountain had seen the forward movement of the British, and notified General
Horatio Gates, who had replaced General Schuyler.
6
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
General Gates ordered Col. Daniel Morgan's frontier
riflemen to track the British march. Some of
Morgan's men brushed with the advance guard of
Burgoyne's center column in a clearing known as
the Freeman Farm, about a mile north of the
American camp. The general battle that followed
swayed back and forth over the farm for more than
three hours. Then, as the British lines began to
waiver in the face of the deadly fire of the
numerically
superior
Americans,
German
reinforcements arrived from the river road. Hurling
them against the American right, Burgoyne steadied
the wavering British line and gradually forced the
Americans to withdraw. Except
for this timely arrival and the near
exhaustion of the Americans'
Willard Mountain in the left distance.
ammunition, Burgoyne might
Attributed: Life Magazine
have been defeated that day.
Though he held the immediate field of battle, Burgoyne had been
stopped about a mile north of the American line and sustained
serious loss.
During this First Battle of Saratoga, the American forces lost ground
to the British. Disagreements in tactics and personalities led to a
heated argument between Generals Gates and Arnold. General
Gates engraved by
Gates relieved Arnold of command as a result. The Ezekiel Ensign Horatio
B.L. Prevost.
farm was occupied by the British army and his house turned into a
hospital. It is reported that twelve officers died there and were buried in the rear.
2.3 Second Battle (The Battle of Bemis Heights)
Shaken by his “victory," General Burgoyne ordered his troops to entrench in the vicinity
of the Freeman Farm and await support from Clinton, who was supposedly preparing to
move north toward Albany from New York City. For nearly three weeks he waited but
Clinton did not come. By now Burgoyne's situation was critical.
Without hope of help from the south and with supplies rapidly diminishing, the British
army became weaker with each passing day. Meanwhile, militia regiments were called
up around New England as reinforcements for the American Army and marched quickly
to join the gathering forces of General Horatio Gates.
On the evening of October 5, 1777, General Burgoyne called a council of war. His army
had rations only for sixteen days longer and he had heard nothing from General Clinton.
As the British officers sat around the council-board, the gloom of the occasion was
7
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
heightened by the frequent firing of the American pickets harassing the British lines, and
by the dismal howling of the large packs of wolves that had come out of the wilderness
to eat the dead.
Burgoyne had to choose between advancing and retreating. After council, he decided to
risk a second engagement, which came to be known as the Battle of Bemis Heights,
and on October 7, 1777, ordered a reconnaissance-in-force to test the American left
flank. Burgoyne made plans to assault the American lines in three columns and drive
them from the field. The main assault would be made by the Germans under Major
General Riedesel against the American forces.
By now the Americans knew that Burgoyne's army was
again on the move and at about 3 p.m. attacked in three
columns under Colonel Daniel Morgan, Gen. Ebenezer
Learned, and Gen. Enoch Poor. Holding their fire until the
troops were well within range, Poor's brigade devastated
the British in the first attack and routed the survivors in a
counter attack.
Colonel Morgan and his sharpshooters attacked and
routed the Canadian infantry and began to engage Fraser's
British regulars. Fraser began to rally his division, and
Benedict Arnold arrived, who although relieved of duty,
Portrait of Daniel Morgan by
could not resist the call of battle. Against orders, he
Charles Willson Peale
arrived on the field and ordered Morgan to concentrate his
fire on the officers, particularly the generals. One of
Morgan's sharpshooters fired and mortally wounded Fraser.
After finishing on Morgan's front, Arnold next rode to Learned's brigade. Learned's men,
facing the German assault, were beginning to falter. With Arnold and Learned in the
lead, the Americans counter-attacked. By now Poor and Morgan were closing in on
either side of the Germans, and their front gave way. The British retreated to their
original positions. Arnold next led Learned's men in an assault on the Germans’
redoubt. Although Arnold was wounded, the Americans took the redoubt. Before being
carried off the field, Arnold tried to bring forward another brigade, but a messenger sent
by Gates to retrieve Arnold finally caught up to him and he was removed with the other
wounded as darkness fell over the field.
The next night, the British began their retreat northward. On the evening of the 9th the
British army reached the Fishkill, and, crossing the ford, took possession of the heights
of Saratoga. In twenty-four hours of marching, they advanced a distance of eight miles
in a pitiless rainstorm. Scarcely able to stand from cold and exposure, they encamped
on the sodden ground, without food or campfires, until the morning of the 10th. Because
the Fishkill was swollen by the abundant rains, turbulent and dangerous, the artillery
was not taken across until daylight on the morning of the 10th.
8
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
2.4 Siege
Because of the pouring rain and the almost impassable condition of the roads, General
Gates did not reach the south bank of the Fishkill, with the main body of his army, until
late afternoon on the 10th. Upon his arrival there he encamped his army along the
heights bordering Fishkill on the south. Assuming that General Burgoyne would
continue his retreat, General Gates ordered an advance across the creek at daybreak in
the morning. On the morning of the 11th, Colonel Morgan crossed the Fishkill, and, to
his surprise, found the enemy's pickets in position, indicating that the main body was
close at hand. General Nixon, with his brigade, also crossed the Fishkill, and surprised
the British pickets at Fort Hardy. General Learned, at the head of two more brigades,
crossed the creek and advanced to the support of Colonel Morgan.
During all this time, a thick fog persisted, and the Americans could not see more than
twenty yards before them. General Learned advanced, and had arrived within two
hundred yards of Burgoyne's strongest post, when the fog suddenly cleared up and
revealed to the astonished Americans the whole British army in their camp under arms.
The Americans beat a hasty retreat in considerable disorder across the Fishkill, under a
heavy fire from the British, and soon regained their camp on the heights along the south
bank of the stream.
When the British vanguard reached Saratoga, Brigadier General John Fellows was
encamped on the west side of the Hudson, with a small body of Americans, his main
force being posted on the hills on the east side of the Hudson, upon the site of old Fort
Clinton of the colonial period. Upon the approach of Burgoyne, General Fellows retired
with his detachment to this strong position on the hills on the east side of the river, to cut
off the retreat of the British in that direction. A strong detachment of American troops
had also been sent by General Gates to take possession of the roads and bridges
above Saratoga, in the direction of Fort Edward. The British army was effectively
hemmed in and surrounded on every side by the American force, which had grown to
nearly 20,000 men.
The British army was now in a most critical position. The main body of the line under
General Burgoyne was encamped on the heights north of the Fishkill. The Germans
under Riedesel were located on the ridge extending northerly towards the Marshall
House, and the artillery was on the elevated plain extending between the Germans and
the river flats. In this exposed position, the British army was completely surrounded by
the American forces. Captain James Furnival of the New England militia was positioned
atop a hill on the east side of the river with artillery. There was not a spot anywhere
throughout the whole British encampment which was not exposed to the fire of the
American batteries positioned on the heights surrounding it.
9
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Escape north along the military road (now Route 32) remained possible until October
12th, but on the 13th a contingent under General John Stark crossed the Hudson from
the east side and blocked the road by establishing a position between Stark's Knob on
the west and an area of marshy ground along the Hudson on the east. Stark's Knob
provided the bottleneck through which lay the only avenue of British escape. The
occupation of this gap was said to be the “corking of the bottle.”
2.5 Surrender
Faced with such overwhelming numbers, Burgoyne surrendered his sword to General
Gates on October 17, 1777. By the terms of the Convention of Saratoga, Burgoyne's
depleted army, some 6,000 men, marched out of its camp "with the Honors of War" and
stacked its weapons along the west bank of the Hudson River at the Field of Grounded
Arms.
“VIEW OF THE PLACE WHERE THE BRITISH LAID DOWN THEIR ARMS”
The Pictorial Field-Book of The Revolution, Lossing, Benson J., 1860.
Lieutenant William Digby of the British 53rd Regiment of Foot recounted the following:
“…About 10 o’clock, we marched out, according to treaty with drums beating and
the honours of war, but the drums seemed to have lost their former inspiriting
sounds, and though we beat the Grenadiers march, which not long before was so
10
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
animating, yet then it seemed by its last feeble effort, as if almost ashamed to be
heard on such an occasion…I shall never forger the appearance of their troops
on our marching past them; a dead silence universally reigned through their
numerous columns, and even then, they seemed struck with our situation and
dare scarce lift up their eyes to view British troops in such a situation.”
Thomas Anburey, a volunteer who served with the British Grenadier Company of the
29th Regiment of Foot, wrote of the surrender:
“On the plain where we piled up our arms, there were numbers of dead horses,
from the stench of which, and from the performance of so humiliating an act, you
will easily imagine our haste in quitting such a spot.”
Surrendered troops marched south along the River, crossing from Stillwater to the
Vandenburgh House in Schaghticoke, on their way to Boston.
Thus was gained one of the most decisive victories in American and world history. The
news that an entire British Army had been not only defeated, but captured with all its
weapons, gave the American forces great credibility. France, in particular, threw its
support behind the American forces, and years later, the French navy and military
played an important role in the surrender of the British at the Battle of Yorktown, and the
ultimate end of the war.
11
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
12
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
3.0
Context
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
3.1
Location and Geographical Area
The Hudson River in Old Saratoga forms part of a historic transportation corridor
extending to the St. Lawrence Valley. For centuries before the Battles of Saratoga, this
corridor provided a route for trade and invasion. Old Saratoga became a battlefield
because of its strategic location on this waterway system.
3.2
History of Preservation Efforts
The Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan builds on many
years of preservation efforts focused on Revolutionary War resources as well as on
other historic resources. Because the Old Saratoga area is so rich in historic resources
that open space, recreation, revitalization and restoration efforts also include efforts to
preserve historic resources.
Saratoga National Historical Park
Under a 1926 law, New York State began to acquire battlefield lands related to the
Battles of Saratoga in the Town of Stillwater in preparation for the sesquicentennial of
the Battles and surrender. The battlefield was made part of the national park system in
1938. Since 1938, the portion of the Battlefield Unit in the Town of Stillwater owned by
the National Park Service has been enlarged and three sites of the Old Saratoga Unit in
the Town of Saratoga have been added to the park: the General Philip Schuyler Estate
in the Village of Schuylerville, and the Saratoga Monument and Victory Woods in the
Village of Victory. The Saratoga National Historical Park currently encompasses the
3,336 acre Battlefield, 30 acre Schuyler Estate, 22 acre Victory Woods and 4 acre
Monument site.
Preservation efforts have also included sites related to the Battles of Saratoga as well
as the viewshed from these important historic resources. In 1971, the Saratoga
National Historical Park and the Town of Easton collaborated on the creation of a land
use map for the Town, relative to the viewshed of the Park. In 2001, the Saratoga
National Historical Park undertook a survey of sites associated with the Battles of
Saratoga, the Siege and the Surrender through the American Battlefields Protection
Program. In 2004, the Park issued an analysis of threats to the viewshed of the Park
which was undertaken as a part of the 2004 General Management Plan. The 2004
viewshed analysis was updated in 2006. In 2006, the site at which British Major
General Burgoyne surrendered his sword to American General Horatio Gates was
acquired though a partnership between the Historic Saratoga-Washington on the
13
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Hudson Partnership and the Open Space Institute with the support of Saratoga National
Historical Park.
These prior studies and initiatives are the foundation for this Plan.
Revolutionary War
Fort Hardy Park Committee: The Fort Hardy Committee, which included citizens, town
and county historians, The Old Saratoga Historical Association, non-profits and
municipal officials, created a master plan for the Field of Grounded Arms and
surrounding lands to incorporate historical interpretation, recreational opportunities and
municipal services in 2005. The field is currently owned by the Village and is used as
recreational ball fields.
Stark’s Knob: A plan was completed in 2006 for additional interpretive opportunities at
Stark’s Knob, which is already protected by the New York State Museum due to the
presence of unique geological resources. The plan was a culmination of processes
including the Saratoga County Historian, the New York State Museum, municipalities,
the Friends of Stark’s Knob citizen’s group, the SNHP and other citizen groups and nonprofits.
German/Canadian Encampment Pocket Park: A plan was completed in 2005 by a
coalition of citizens, town and county historians, The Old Saratoga Historical
Association, non-profits and municipal officials for an interpretive park near the site of
this encampment.
Other Preservation
New York State has undertaken many historic preservation planning processes as well
as open space conservation planning processes to address the needs of sites of
statewide significance.
In 1998 the National Park Service completed a study that resulted in the Erie Canalway
National Heritage Corridor Act in 2000. The Erie Canalway National Heritage Corridor is
one of nearly 30 federally designated national heritage areas. Its purpose is to help
preserve and interpret the historical, natural, scenic, and recreational resources
reflecting its national significance and to help foster revitalization of canal -side
communities. The Corridor includes 524 miles of navigable waterway that makes up the
New York State Canal System. It includes (amongst others) the Champlain Canal and
its historic alignments and the cities, towns and villages that touch the canal system.
The Canalway Commission began its Preservation and Management Plan in 2003.
Rather than a physical master plan detailing infrastructural or building projects to be
undertaken, the Corridor’s Plan offers guidance to its community partners in formulating
14
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
comprehensive regional policies and taking action to achieve the Corridor’s full
potential.
The Agricultural Stewardship Association, a land trust serving Washington County and
towns in northern Rensselaer County, completed a strategic farmland conservation plan
in 2006 that designated six Priority Conservation Areas containing significant amounts
of high quality farmland that are conducive to long-term agricultural business
environment. The Hudson River/Route 40 Corridor was ranked as its highest Priority
Conservation Area. This PCA is notable because it not only contains the highest
concentration of prime soils and large productive farms, but it also contains the highest
concentration of conserved farmland in the region. It is also notable because it makes
up a large part of the viewshed of the Saratoga National Battlefield.
Old Saratoga on the Hudson is a community-based intermunicipal effort, begun in 2003.
Its vision is to unite the communities along both sides of the Hudson River in the historic
region known as “Old Saratoga” in one revolutionary, regional effort to protect the area’s
extraordinary beauty, history and heritage while enhancing the quality of life and
economic stability of the people who live in the region today, and for those who will
follow. The plan to carry out this vision includes steps to celebrate and restore the
area’s waterfront heritage, foster sustainable economic development, connect the
community’s past with its future, work to protect the area’s rural and scenic landscape,
and promote well planned, proportioned, high quality tourism development.
As a natural progression from Old Saratoga on the Hudson, the Historic SaratogaWashington on the Hudson Partnership was recently formed by New York State
Legislature due to the tireless efforts of New York State Assembly members Roy
McDonald and Steven Englebright.
This visionary organization will address
collaborative agriculture and open space protection, tourism development, revitalization
efforts, recreational development and protection of natural, cultural and historic heritage.
The organization is charged with creating a stewardship plan to protect the unique
historic and natural significance as a primary birthplace of the United States of America.
Beginning with Native Americans in pre-colonial times to early European trading posts,
the French and Indian War, the American Revolution, and the 19th century commercial
and industrial development related to the building of the Erie and Champlain Canals, the
area is distinguished by its scenic and natural features, agricultural uses and historic
Hudson River towns.
Also as an outgrowth of the Old Saratoga on the Hudson initiative, the Old Saratoga on
the Hudson Waterfront Revitalization Plan was completed in June 2007. The Advisory
Committee included the Town of Saratoga Supervisor Thomas N. Wood, III, Town of
Northumberland Supervisor Bill Peck, Town of Easton Supervisor John Rymph, Village
of Schuylerville Mayor John Sherman, Village of Victory Mayor George Sullivan, Town
of Greenwich Planning Board Member Daniel Spigner, Saratoga County Environmental
Services Director and Northumberland Town Councilman George Hodgson, Easton
Planning Board Chair and Saratoga National Historical Park staff representative Joseph
15
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Finan, and Saratoga P.L.A.N. staff representative Diane Metz. This Plan identified a
wide range of projects to preserve historical, scenic, recreational and open space
resources and projects to preserve or interpret historical sites and events related to
Early French and Indian Wars, the Old Champlain Canal and the Revolutionary War.
The Plan is a locally prepared, comprehensive land and water use program for the
area’s natural, public, working waterfront, and developed coastal area. It provides a
comprehensive structure within which critical waterfront issues can be addressed. The
Waterfront Revitalization Plan is a voluntary, grass roots effort which brings together
local and state governments, commerce and industry, environmental interests, private
organizations, and community citizens to assess current opportunities and constraints
and to build a consensus on the desired future of the community's waterfront. More
importantly, this Waterfront Revitalization Plan provides a strategy for achieving that
vision and Old Saratoga on the Hudson Waterfront Revitalization Plan for managing
local resources.
Lakes to Locks is a regional planning organization which concentrates efforts for
regional tourism and historic preservation around Lakes George and Champlain and the
Champlain Canal. Planning has included historic tours and interpretive opportunities.
3.3
Community Characteristics
The project area encompasses a portion of the region known as the Old Saratoga on
the Hudson region. The Old Saratoga on the Hudson region includes the towns of
Easton and Greenwich in Washington County and the towns of Northumberland,
Saratoga, and Stillwater and villages of Schuylerville and Victory in Saratoga County.
The Advisory Committee determined the geographic project area to be the geographic
locations of significant events that took place 24 hours prior to the start of the First
Battle through the siege and surrender. A graphic representation of the geographic
study area can be found the in Phase One Report by Dodson Associates, Appendix A.
Saratoga and Washington Counties differ in a number of important respects. Saratoga
County has 519,580 acres within its boundaries and had a population of 200,635 in
2000, roughly 247 people per square mile. Washington County is comprised of 534,680
acres with a 2000 population of 61,042, roughly 73 people per square mile.
The character of the Washington County is identified by its agricultural history, traditions
and culture. The region's agricultural industry remains healthy and viable due to the
combination of sufficient farmland and farm size, skilled and knowledgeable farmers,
and the surrounding agricultural infrastructure. It is the only remaining region of this type
in the Hudson Valley. Washington County ranks within the top 10 counties in New York
State for production of maple products, dairy products, beef and calves, and tomatoes.
Washington County ranks 12th in New York for number of farms and 10th for land in
agriculture.
16
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Sprawl, the scourge of many formerly productive agricultural regions, is a serious threat
to Washington County. The productive land, the agricultural way of life, the beautiful
vistas and the healthy environment are threatened by nearby and internal development
and real estate price pressures. With its proximity to the expanding communities of the
Capital District and with lower real estate costs than neighboring areas, Washington
County is experiencing significant development pressure.
Within the region, first and second home owners are buying and developing farmland
for mainly residential purposes. From 2005 to 2006, Washington County is estimated to
have lost 10 farms (845 to 835), totaling 1400 acres (203,200 to 201,800). In 2003,
there were 205,800 acres in farms, 38 percent of the county's total 534,680 acres.
There were 880 farms in the county averaging 234 acres per farm. The county's farmers
are concerned that if greater action is not taken to protect the land base, the present
agricultural viability of the region will lose its critical mass and begin to collapse.
While Saratoga County has much less land in agricultural use than Washington County,
it still has approximately 74,400 acres of farmland, which is nearly 15% of the total land
base. Most of this farmland is within the municipalities comprising this study area.
Importantly, in 1950, there were 200,349 acres of farmland making up 38.6% of the total
land base in the county.
In spite of Saratoga County’s relatively fewer acres in agricultural production, in 2005,
Saratoga County ranked as the number one county in New York for both number of
equine and total value of equine. This is a reflection of the significance of the Saratoga
Race Course to Saratoga County’s economy, as well as that of the surrounding
counties. It is estimated that the economic impact of the Race Course to Saratoga,
Washington and other surrounding counties is between $186 million and $214 million
annually.
With the exception of the Village of Victory, all of the communities in the study area
experienced a significant increase in the number of households between 1990 and
2000, increasing the pressure for additional residential development beyond that
expected based solely on population increase (Table 3.1). In the future, it has been
estimated that Saratoga County will grow by an additional 58,000 people over the next
35 years. Because the size of the average household in decreasing, the number of
housing units will grow at a rate faster than expected based just on population changes.
Adding to the current rate of growth and the expected, future rate of growth, Luther
Forest, a large technology park, has recently been planned for Saratoga County. AMD,
a large employer expected to locate in Luther Forest, is expected to bring 1,100 highly
skilled, technical jobs with it. With unemployment rates in both Washington and
Saratoga Counties (4.9 and 4.1, respectively, for January 2007) below the overall rates
for both the State and the Country (5.2 and 5.1, respectively, for January 2007), it can
be expected that many of the necessary employees will relocate from other areas,
further increasing the pressure for development.
17
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Table 3.1
Municipality
Town
of
Northumberland
Town
of
Saratoga
Village
Schuylerville
Village
Victory
Town
Stillwater
Study Area
Saratoga
County
Saratoga
County
Household
Income
Population
1990
2000
Change
Households
1990
2000
Change
3,645
4,603
26.3%
1,173
1,593
35.8%
37,676
3,124
3,400
8.8%
1,135
1,301
14.6%
32,806
1,364
1,197
-12.2%
519
536
3.3%
29,016
581
544
-6.4%
205
189
-7.8%
29,388
7,233
7,522
4.0%
2,539
2,786
9.7%
38,145
15,947
17,266
8.3%
5,571
6,405
15.0%
*
181,276
200,635
10.7%
66,425
78,165
17.7%
42,364
2,203
2,259
2.5%
737
854
15.9%
43,194
4,557
4,896
7.4%
1,680
1,927
14.7%
39,138
6,760
7,155
5.8%
2417
2781
15.1%
*
59,330
61,042
2.9%
20,256
22,458
10.9%
37,524
of
of
of
in
Town of Easton
Town
of
Greenwich
Study Area in
Washington
County
Washington
County
New York State 17,990,455 18,976,457 5.5%
6,639,322 7,056,860 6.3%
43,393
Source: US Bureau of the Census; Census 2000; Census 1990.
* Study area is not a unit of measure by the US Bureau of Census; therefore no data is available.
3.4
Current Land Uses and Regulations
Compounding the increased development pressure linked to increased population,
Upstate New York is experiencing the phenomenon of “sprawl without growth.” The
total urbanized land increased in Upstate New York between 1982 and 1997 by 30%
while the population grew only 2.6%, reducing the overall density of the built
environment by 21%. The immediate area surrounding Saratoga and Washington
Counties saw an overall population growth of slightly less than 9%, with an associated
decrease in density by 29%.
While all development displaces open space to some degree, sprawling development
displaces at a higher rate. Unplanned, sprawling development displaces farmland,
habitat, historic sites and landscapes, and wetlands, compromising the quality of life
enjoyed by residents.
18
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
One important factor in controlling sprawl is municipal land use regulations. The land
use practices and regulations of each municipalities included in this study were
evaluated for presence of a comprehensive plan, zoning regulation, subdivision
regulation, site plan review, conservation subdivision accommodations, land
conservation regulations related to open space, agriculture and scenic values, and
historic preservation. The summary of those land uses follows in Table 3.2, with zoning
maps, where available, in appendices.
Also, in New York State, most projects or activities proposed by a state agency or unit
of local government, and all discretionary approvals (permits) from a NYS agency or
unit of local government, require an environmental impact assessment as prescribed by
the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA). SEQRA requires the
sponsoring or approving governmental body to consider environmental impacts equally
with social and economic factors during discretionary decision-making, and to identify
and mitigate the significant environmental impacts of the activity it is proposing or
permitting. Under SEQRA, local agencies may designate specific geographic areas
within their boundaries as "Critical Environmental Areas" (CEAs). State agencies may
also designate geographic areas they own, manage or regulate.
19
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Table 3.2
Town
Greenwich
(Appendix G)
Town of Easton
(Appendix F)
of
Town
of
Northumberland
Town of Saratoga
Village
Schuylerville
of
Town
Stillwater
(Appendix H)
of
Comprehensive
Plan
Yes,
Update
1990;
Funding
received
for
another update
Yes, 2004
Yes, Update 2003
Yes, Update 2002
Yes, 2005
Open Space Plan
No
No
Yes, jointly with
Saratoga
Yes, jointly with
Northumberland
No
Zoning
No,
although
1984
Plan
includes land use
overlays
Draft available for
public review
Yes
Yes, and currently
under review
No
Yes
Yes
Subdivision
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes, and currently
under review
No
Yes
Yes
Conservation
Subdivision
No
Cluster Zoning in
draft
Cluster
Zoning;
PUDD
model
ordinance
Yes, and currently
under review
No
Cluster
subdivision, PDD
Yes,
PDD
Site Plan Review
No
Yes
Yes
Yes, and currently
under review
Yes
Yes
Yes
Design
Development
Guidelines
Yes
Included in draft,
but only if site
plan
review
required
or
Yes, 2006
Village of Victory
Yes, 2004
No
through
No,
but
archeologically
sensitive
and
conservancy zones
have
increased
restrictions & siting
requirements
20
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Land
Conservation
Critical
Environmental
Area
(CEA)
Designation; land
use designation
of “conservation”
in 1984 Plan;
Steep
Slopes
(>15%)
CEA - Hudson &
Battenkill
set
backs and Ag
land
in
draft;
Steep
slopes
>15%
and
ridgelines in draft
design guidelines;
Shoreline
Overlay;
Watercourse
Protection Article
Wetlands
Conservancy
District and Steep
Slopes
(>15%);
Conservancy Zone
around the Fish
Creek and Hudson
River. All currently
under review
No
?
Fish
Creek
Drainage
Overlay
No
No; Architectural
guidelines
applicable
on
Main St. in Village
in draft
No
A
map
of
archeologically
sensitive areas in
included
in
the
comp plan and is
used in site and
planning
board
review,
and
currently
under
review
No
?
Recreation and
Historic District
No;
although
design
stds
applicable
on
prime ag soils or
soils of statewide
importance, per
draft
Ag
Protection
District
Yes, and currently
under review
No
Ag District
N/A
No
Rural
Overlay
Recommended
Comp Plan
No
?
No
Historic
Preservation
Overlay
/
Agriculture
Preservation
Overlay
/
Ag
Overlay
Scenic
Preservation
Overlay
/
1971 Viewshed
Map - SNHP
District
Road
in
21
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
22
4.0
Preservation Priorities
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Benefits
Beyond the obvious historic, educational, commemorative and cultural benefits of the
preservation of battlefields and other historic sites, preservation yields economic and
environmental benefits. These additional positive effects of preservation of sites related
to the Battles of Saratoga will be felt by all the municipalities in the study area in many
ways.
Reasonably, municipal officials are concerned with their tax base, tax rates, tax revenue
and the cost of provision of services. However, approaches presumed to be beneficial
to these concerns may actually be detrimental. For instance, broadening the tax base
does not always mean that tax rates will go down. Costs for roads, water and sanitary
sewer, schools and emergency service can far outweigh the tax revenue, especially
when development is primarily residential. While commercial development puts less of
a direct strain on schools and emergency services (although associated residential
development will exert those strains), required infrastructure can minimize any gain
made.
While it may seem counterintuitive at first blush, protection of open space, including
battlefields and other historic sites preserved as open space, whether open to the public
or not, is beneficial to the tax base. Protection of open space increases local property
value, thereby increasing a municipality’s property tax base. Potential property tax
increases associated with construction of the infrastructure necessary to support
development, such as roads and schools, can be minimized by the preservation of
battlefields as open space. Management of the quality and supply of open space
prevents flood damage and provides a less expensive and natural alternative for
providing clean drinking water.
Protection of historical sites offers a boon to local economies. Historic sites open to the
public draw visitors interested in our heritage. As an income generator, battlefields
attract the direct economic benefit from tourism and site management, which create
jobs. Battlefields and other historic sites have an advantage over other industries: they
are permanent. While other employers may relocate when they have exhausted natural
resources or outsource work, battlefields are necessarily committed to their
communities.
The Saratoga National Historical Park, made of three sites currently open to the public
and one to be opened in the future, is proof of this significance. In 2004, SNHP hosted
114,007 visitors to its sites. On average, each of those visitors spent $62 per day,
resulting in a total contribution to the local economy of $7 million. Expanding the
activities and sites to visit will encourage visitors to stay longer, requiring meals, lodging
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
23
and entertainment. It is reasonable to assume that more activities and sites will draw a
larger total number of visitors in addition to increasing the stay of those already visiting.
An increase in visitors to the Old Saratoga Region could have a significant effect on the
economies of the municipalities. The Cobb Historic Tourism Survey, an economic study
of the benefits of tourism done in Cobb County, Georgia, which includes the Kennesaw
Mountain Battlefield, highlights the increased benefits. In 1991, Kennesaw Mountain
Battlefield hosted 787,400 visitors. In that same year, the county realized 22,700 travelrelated jobs and $871 million in visitor spending, which translated to local tax receipts of
$34 million.
Preservation of battlefields as open space can offer a variety of environmental benefits
in addition to historic, cultural and economic benefits. Preservation of battlefields as
open space can also protect important habitats and provide wildlife corridors and
linkages. Preservation can also protect aquifer recharge areas, ensuring continuation of
working wetlands that protect the water supply and protect against flood damage. Open
space preservation, including protection of historic sites and battlefields, protects
working lands by removing the development pressure and redirecting new growth to
existing developed areas.
The SNHP is a good example of environmental benefits secondary to historic
preservation. Four tributaries of the Hudson River drain the Park and an aquifer
recharge area exists under the Park. Forty-nine wetlands have been inventoried in the
Park, and the Hudson River’s 100 year flood plain encompasses nearly 12% of the
Park. One hundred eighty species of birds, 39 species of mammals, 16 of amphibians,
14 of fish and 10 of reptiles are documented in the park. Of the wildlife species known
to inhabit the park, 16 bird species and 4 amphibian species are on the New York State
list of endangered, threatened, rare and of special concern list.
Clearly, a community needs a balance of residential and commercial development and
land preservation to maximize benefits of each. When assessing the benefits of
battlefield preservation open to the public, it will be important for each municipality to
balance the economic benefits with the stress that may created on the infrastructure
and environment of increased visitation.
Priorities
The case for preservation of significant historical sites is clear; which sites to preserve
and how to preserve them is not quite as clear. It is the intent of this plan to assist
communities in identifying priority sites for preservation. The Old Saratoga Region is
rich in prehistoric and historic resources, including those related to the Battles of
Saratoga, arguably one of the most decisive battles in history. The region is already
fortunate to have much of the battlefields of the Battles of Saratoga, Burgoyne’s final
encampment, Victory Woods, and the Schuyler House protected by the National Park
Service and Burgoyne’s sword surrender site protected by the Historic SaratogaBattles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
24
Washington on the Hudson Partnership and Open Space Institute (OSI). However,
there are many documented sites and sites that need more investigation related to
these important battles that are threatened and deserving of protection.
The Old Saratoga Region is also fortunate for its magnificent viewshed around the
protected and unprotected sites related to the Battles. Briefly, a viewshed is the
landscape that can be seen from a particular point, in this case, from any of the
significant historic sites including the SNHP.
Viewshed is important to the
understanding of a particular historic site and the events that occurred there. Scenic
values represent a landscape that draws visitors and residents alike to it. Contextual
values help interpret an historic site’s significance in relation to the people, places and
events around it. For a complete discussion of scenic, viewshed and contextual values,
please refer to Dodson’s Phase One Report.
Much of the view from the Saratoga National Historical Park is as it was at the time of
the Battles. The viewshed adds to the total experience of the community’s members as
well as visitors to the Park and provides increased interpretive opportunities. This is not
the case at every historical park, making this a resource worth protecting. A community
should plan carefully for the use of land adjacent to a battlefield or other historic site, so
that the adjacent use does not detract from the solemnity and significance of the site,
whether it is open to the public or not.
As outlined in Section 3.0, the project area encompasses the geographic locations of
significant events that took place 24 hours prior to the start of the first Battle. Because
the British loss was so unexpected and significant, events through the siege, surrender
and the march of the British troops back to Boston, up to the geographic edge of the Old
Saratoga on the Hudson region, were included. A graphic representation of the
geographic study area can be found the in Phase One Report by Dodson Associates,
Appendix A.
The first phase of this Plan, completed by Dodson Associates, Ltd., identified priority
historical sites, highest visibility features and the most scenic views. Dodson
Associates undertook an in-depth inventory and assessment process, mapping and
visual analysis using Geographic Information System technology and a public
participation process. Through this approach, priority resources were identified and an
analysis was prepared that provides the basis for the creation of this Plan for the
ultimate protection of the unique and culturally important scenic and historic resources
of the region. Map 4.1 represents the mapping of the verified historic sites and those
sites requiring further investigation. Map 4.2 represents the viewshed analysis, Map 4.3
represents the combination of priority historic sites and viewshed and Map 4.4
represents the scenic analysis. For a complete discussion of Dodson’s qualifications to
complete this phase as well as its methodology and findings, see Appendix A.
Dodson combined the results of their historic resources inventory and ranking, scenic
resources assessment and viewshed analysis with data from a threat assessment
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
25
completed by the LA Group for the Saratoga National Historical Park (Map 4.5) to
create a composite map of sites most in need of protection (Map 4.6). The LA Group’s
report is included in Appendix B.
To make the mapping accessible and useful to each of the municipalities for planning
purposes, an enlarged view of the historic resources, viewshed and composite maps for
each municipality is included (Maps 4.7 though 4.13). The historical significance of
each site noted can be found in Section 2.
4.1
Town of Easton, Map 4.7 a-c
The results of this viewshed
analysis echo those of the
viewshed analysis completed in
1971 by the Town of Easton and
the Saratoga National Historical
Park. The Town of Easton boasts
the significant historic sites of
Willard Mountain, Fording Point of
General Fellows Troops, General
Fellows Battery, East Bank River British Tete-du-Point, East Bank
River - American Tete-du-Pont,
and General Fellows Camp.
Cooke Hollow, Easton
Easton also has a number of
photo © 2005 ASA
contextual sites that retain much of
their integrity including the site of the DeRidder Ferry, the Battenkill, the site of the
Sarles Ferry, the Becker Farm and Ferry and the Coffin Farm. The Town of Easton is
also home to significant viewshed and scenic areas. Along the eastside of the Hudson
River, the ridge forming the river valley is highly visible from many of the prioritized
historic sites and the National Park, as is the ridge encompassing Willard Mountain.
Also along the eastside of the Hudson, the extensive agricultural lands in Easton are
scenically valuable.
The Coffin Farm and a number of parcels with high scenic value in Easton have already
been protected by conservation easements. However, since Easton does not have
zoning regulations per se, although the Town has other land use regulations that
function much like zoning regulations, the threat assessments done by the LA Group
found many of the significant areas under a high threat level. Further discussion is
included in the Implementation section.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
26
4.2
Town of Greenwich, Map 4.8 a-c
Because of the decision to limit this
study to events occurring 24 hours
before the first Battle, many important
historical sites were excluded, including
the confirmed continuation of the Great
War Trail. One site worthy of further
investigation is a parcel now known as
the Georgia Pacific site. There are
secondary sources indicating that the
Great War Trail, which Burgoyne
traveled to the fording point across the
Hudson River, crossed this site.
Battenkill
photo © Jim Newton
Within the chronological scope of this
plan, Greenwich hosts the Pontoon
Bridge site and Furnival’s Battery, both significant historical sites that have retained
much of their integrity. Interestingly, the only shot fired from Greenwich in the Battles of
Saratoga, Siege and Surrender came from Furnival’s Battery. Additionally, much of
land between the Hudson River and the Battenkill are important scenically, to the
viewshed, as well as to the context of the Battles. The original threat assessments
completed by the LA Group found significant areas in Greenwich to be under a high
threat level because the Town did not have zoning regulations. Since those
assessments, Greenwich has published draft zoning regulations which may alter the
threat level of these areas.
4.3
Town of Northumberland, Map 4.9 a-c
As with the Town of Greenwich, because
of the time frame limitation of this study,
only a portion of the Town of
Northumberland is included in the study
area. However, two highly significant
historical sites are included: Stark’s Knob
and Morgan’s Line. Also notably, the
March of British Troops began on the
Northumberland side of what is now
known as Lock 5 Island. Much of the
remainder of this area is scenically
significant.
View from Stark’s Knob
New York State Museum
Stark’s Knob is owned by New York State
Department of Education and already
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
27
protected. However, due to development pressure and development suitability, the LA
Group assigned the lots including the majority of Morgan’s Line as moderately high risk.
4.4
Town of Saratoga, Map 4.10 a-c
Saratoga is fortunate to host many sites the
significance of which are confirmed by primary
historic sources.
The Yaegers Camp, Gates
Floating Bridge, American Earthworks attributed to
Learned, Dovegat Home site, High Ground British
Encampment, Gates Headquarters, British Camp
(North End), the continuation of Morgan's Line from
Northumberland, Wilbur Road and Burgoyne’s
Sword Surrender Site are all within the Town. The
march of British troops to the main field of
engagement continues through Saratoga.
Dovegat Home Site
Photo credit: www.revolutionaryday.com
Since this planning process began, the Sword Surrender site has been protected, as
previously noted, and Gates Floating Bridge has been protected by OSI through a
conservation easement. Because of the Town’s proximity to the SNHP and significant
areas of troop movements outside of the Park proper, there are large parcels along the
Town’s southern border that are worthy of protection. Because these parcels are also
contiguous with other protected parcels, the benefits of further protection will be
increased. One such parcel, the Ritson Property, has also been identified as a site
worthy of further investigation - secondary sources indicate that there may have been a
British encampment on this property. The Ritson Property is in process of protection by
Saratoga P.L.A.N. (Preserving Land and Nature).
4.5
Village of Schuylerville, Map 4.11 a-c
Schuyler House
Photo credit: www.villageofschuylerville.org
Much of the Village is significant to the
viewshed of Saratoga National Historical
Park properties. In addition, the Village
boasts many significant historic sites outside
the SNHP including the mouth of Fish Creek,
the Assembly Area, the Field of Grounded
Arms, the site of the Convention signing, a
British Artillery camp, one of Burgoyne’s War
council sites, including earthworks, and
Revolutionary War graves. The Assembly
Area and the Field of Grounded Arms are
part of the Town’s park, and therefore are
protected from development. However, while
the park is used primarily for recreation
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
28
including ball fields, planning has begun to incorporate more interpretive opportunities
without sacrificing residents’ recreation opportunities.
4.6
Town of Stillwater, Map 4.12 a-c
A large portion of the study area within the
Town of Stillwater is included in the Saratoga
National Historical Park. The Town has taken
great strides towards protecting the viewshed
of the SNHP already. A number of parcels
surrounded by the SNHP have already been
placed under agriculture easements, ensuring
the views remain much as they were during the
Battles and protecting the March of British
Troops, British Pickets and British Fortification
sites from development. Significant historical Block House
sites including Morgan’s Flank Defense (the Photo credit: Dodson Associates, Ltd.
Munger Farm), American Fortifications,
Swampy Place, Ezekiel Ensign Home Site and Wright's Ferry Site, as well as areas
significant to the viewshed are included in parcels that are contiguous with the Park.
4.7
Village of Victory, Map 4.13 a-c
The Village of Victory also houses the Saratoga
Monument and a unit of the Saratoga National Historical
Park known as Victory Woods, which is slated to be open
to the public in the future. Victory also is home to the
British Camp, American Earthworks Remains, General
Burgoyne’s Fortified Camp, Gates Line and the Dutch
Church. Victory’s East side is significant to the viewshed
of the SNHP and other historical sites.
Saratoga Monument
Photo credit: Dodson Associates, Ltd.
Because there is such variety in the types of sites to
preserve, goals of preservation, current ownership of
priority sites, municipality land use regulations, and
potential partners in preservation, it is also necessary to
have a variety of preservation tools available. Sections 5
and 6, below, outline voluntary, regulatory and incentive
tools that can be used individually or in combination to
craft a preservation plan that appeals to a wide range of
partners.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
29
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
30
5.0
Voluntary Preservation Tools
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Conservation values of land, agricultural, historic, scenic or environmental, can be
directly protected in a variety of ways. Partial or full interest in land can be purchased or
donated to a municipality or a qualified non-profit organization. Donation brings with it a
variety of tax credits, which are outlined below.
Once protected, ownership, either full or partial, of lands with conservation values brings
with it the duty to responsibly steward the land. This will mean at least annual
professional monitoring of the property for violations and necessary remediation or
challenge to violators. The cost of stewardship can vary widely, depending on the
nature of the abutting land uses, the size and terrain of the property, the availability of
staff trained in the technology necessary to monitor conservation lands and the cost of
the GPS and mapping technology.
The archeological resources of a historic site require additional consideration in
stewardship. According to the National Park Service, development has posed a
significant threat to archeological sites across the country in recent years. Although
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires an assessment of
historic properties (which include archeological sites) affected by federal undertakings,
many sites on private lands are destroyed by construction projects. Development poses
a greater risk to sites on non-federal land because few laws regulate private property,
although changes to historic land may require compliance with the State Historic
Preservation Office’s requirements, increasing the costs of stewardship and access.
Damage to protected archeological sites can occur through environmental or human
degradation.
Although environmental degradation can be significant, human
degradation is generally the main source of site damage and is the most difficult type of
site destruction to control. Human degradation can take several forms, including
development, unintentional damage, vandalism, looting, and mismanagement and each
must be managed differently.
There are two resident land trusts in Old Saratoga: Saratoga PLAN, Preserving Land
and Nature, which covers Saratoga County, and Agricultural Stewardship Association,
which covers the Washington County area. Also protecting property in the Old
Saratoga region is the Open Space Institute, based in New York City. As professional
lands trusts protecting thousands of acres, each has the staffing and expertise to
monitor and steward conservation lands properly.
5.1
Fee Interest
The land can be purchased outright, with a fee interest (meaning that the owner controls
all rights associated with the parcel, including development) being transferred to the
purchasing municipality or qualified non-profit. The land can be purchased for full
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
31
market value or at a bargain sale, each of which have different tax implications for the
seller of the land. The purchaser would then be responsible for maintenance,
stewardship and monitoring, public access and liability issues.
This approach reduces conflicts over conservation approaches since the public bears
the cost. On the downside, acquisition reduces the amount of land on the tax rolls
initially. However, in the long-term, land acquired by either a municipality or non-profit
typically raises the value of nearby property, increasing tax rolls.
Because political will can change in a municipality, it is often recommended that
conservation lands owned in fee by a municipality also have a conservation easement
placed on them. The conservation easement would be held by the local land trust,
giving the land trust the responsibility, along with the Town, of proper stewardship.
Under such an arrangement, the municipality would retain responsibility for liability
issues.
Acquisition in fee affords the most protection for a sensitive property, since all of the
rights owned and stewarded by an appropriate entity. However, it is too costly to
reasonably protect all resources. Therefore, ownership of just the rights most important
to the protecting entity, through conservation easement or purchase of development
rights programs, is often a useful compromise.
5.2
Conservation Easement
A conservation easement is a voluntary and legally binding agreement between a
private landowner and a municipal agency or qualified non-profit corporation to restrict
the development, management, or use of land in perpetuity. The non-profit or
municipality holds the conservation interest and is empowered to enforce its restrictions
against the current landowner and all subsequent owners of the land. A conservation
easement does not enable the holder to use the development rights or to assign them to
another holder for use. A conservation easement is a negative restriction enforceable
by a party who may have no other interest in the subject land than the conservation
easement.
The landowner retains the rights to sell, transfer and use the property in any way
consistent with the provisions of the conservation easement. The landowner and all
future landowners use the property in any way that is consistent with the terms of the
conservation easement, while protecting the conservation values of the land.
A conservation easement is superior to protection by deed restriction in a number of
ways. Deed restrictions place limitations on purchasers of a property within the deed
itself. On its face, this option would seem easy and efficient. However, enforcement of
deed restrictions is left to neighboring property owners, who can choose not to exercise
that authority. Deed restrictions can also be extinguished by the written agreement of
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
32
all neighboring property owners. Because of this lack of assurance of permanent
restriction, deed restrictions do not qualify landowners for state and federal tax benefits.
An agricultural conservation easement permanently limits the type of non-agricultural
development that can occur on the land. Many easements allow limited future
development to occur if the resource values of the property are not unduly
compromised. Development can be allowed for structures necessary to agricultural
production, distribution and sale, depending on the needs of the landowner and the
conservation values to be preserved.
A preservation easement protects a significant historic, archaeological, or cultural
resource. As with other conservation easements, a preservation easement provides
assurance to the owner of a historic or cultural property that the property's intrinsic
values will be preserved through subsequent ownership. In addition, the owner may
obtain substantial tax benefits. Historic preservation easements can be used to protect
historic structures, an historic landscape, a battlefield, or archaeological site. Under the
terms of an easement, a property owner grants a portion of his or her property rights to
an organization whose mission includes historic preservation.
Conservation easements are less expense than fee purchase and more restrictive and
permanent than zoning regulations. Since landowners decide to protect their land and
may benefit from tax incentives, the restriction encounters less resistance from the
public. Easements, however, leave land in private ownership, denying public access
and lessening public influence in which lands or resources should be protected.
5.3
Lease-to-Purchase Contracts
Lease-to-purchase contract can be used when a decision has been made to buy a
property but upfront funds are unavailable. Under such an arrangement, acquisition can
be paid for in periodic payments, or installments, that include principal, interest, and
associated costs. These contracts do not necessarily bind a future government to a
purchase. Most governments can, however, enter into a conditional agreement to pay
principal and interest subject to annual appropriation. In general, the economic effect of
a lease-to-purchase is similar to that of a bond, but the arrangement is structured so
that it does not violate constitutional limitations on borrowing or affect the debt ceiling. A
drawback is that the more complicated a transaction is, the higher the transaction costs,
unless these are offset in other ways.
5.4
Purchase of Development Rights
Similar in concept to a conservation easement is a purchase of development rights
(PDR) program that allows a municipality to pay a landowner for restricting the future
use of the land. In some cases, municipalities would change the zoning of a property in
such a way as to limit the uses available to the landowner and make the property less
valuable. In their use as zoning tools, PDR programs were invented as a way to ensure
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
33
that landowners receive fair compensation for a decrease in the number and type of
rights that can be exercised.
PDR programs can utilize a variety of tools that vary in their actual protection of the
land. Traditionally, in the study area, PDR programs utilize conservation easements as
the protection mechanism, which afford the most protection. Although this is not the
case for PDR programs in existence within the study area, if the land is not permanently
protected by a conservation easement, such programs may be subject to revision or
abolition in the future.
In light of this, the restriction in a PDR program should take the form of a conservation
easement under which the landowner retains title to the land and the municipality or
land trust gains the right and responsibility to enforce the restriction that the easement
imposes on the land’s development. The cost of the development rights is the
difference between the value of the land with the development restriction on it and the
value of the land for its “highest and best use,” which is usually commercial or
residential development. In exchange for placing the development restriction on the
property, the owner may receive a number of tax benefits including reduced property
taxes and estate taxes.
Both Washington and Saratoga Counties have successful PDR programs in place.
Both counties focus primarily on agricultural lands, but other resources could be
protected either through the County programs or through locally created and funded
programs.
5.5
Voluntary Transfer of Development Rights
Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) programs are typically considered in their
mandatory form, which is discussed more fully in Section 6.2.4. In mandatory TDR,
development in sensitive sending areas is decreased by “sending” it, through the use of
credits developers purchase from land owners in sending districts, to receiving districts
deemed more appropriate for development. In its voluntary form, incentives could be
given to a developer for preserving land in a sensitive sending area and developing land
in the less sensitive receiving area.
Generally, voluntary techniques for land preservation are much less controversial and
generate more public support than regulatory strategies. Voluntary approaches assume
that landowners are willing to sell their land or easements and contractually agree to the
approach. Regulatory techniques, on the other hand, can be politically unpopular. The
Old Saratoga region is very near the Adirondack Park Agency boundaries and as such
may be particularly sensitive to government intrusion and bureaucracy. As a result, if
voluntary measures are to be used, it would be wise to specifically note that land will be
acquired only from willing sellers.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
34
However, regulatory approaches can be effective in preventing development in sensitive
areas and controlling patterns of development. They can be used to raise fees to pay for
improvements and conservation measures with responsibility placed on developers, as
is discussed more in Section 7. Incentive zoning may give developers more options and
incentives to tailor development to fit the site and community needs.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
35
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
36
6.0
Regulatory and Incentive Tools
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
6.1
Comprehensive Planning
All of the Towns and Villages involved in this preservation plan have already taken the
important step of creating a comprehensive land use plan. Because a community’s
comprehensive plan is its fundamental land management plan and the basis for the
community’s zoning or other land use ordinance, planning should precede any adoption
or amendment of a land use regulation. Within the plan, provisions can be made for
open-space planning and open-space preservation goals of the community.
6.2
Land Use Regulations and Zoning
Zoning is the separation or division of a municipality into districts, the regulation of
buildings and structures in such districts in accordance with their construction and the
nature and extent of their use, and the dedication of such districts to particular uses
designed to serve the general welfare. It is intended to protect the character, harmony
and stability of residential and business areas. Zoning has traditionally been used to
separate incompatible types of development geographically. Zoning districts allow
certain types of development as of right and others by special permit, although those
not allowed as of right or by special permit are prohibited within that district.
This negative control of development may allow for the separation of incompatible land
uses, but it does not necessarily provide a means for encouraging development
patterns that are beneficial or desirable to the community. Some municipalities have
attempted to minimize the impact of development in sensitive areas by lowering the
density required by zoning and increasing the minimum lot size. However, this is often
unsuccessful. There may be a reduction in the number of houses, but there is no
corresponding reduction in the loss of scenic values or agricultural, forest and
recreational land use. Without design guidelines for the siting of houses, there is little
control over the ultimate visual impact of development.
6.2.1 Incentive or Average Density Zoning
Incentive zoning is a development in land use regulation that addresses that limitation of
traditional zoning. The purpose of incentive zoning is to advance the locality's physical,
cultural and social objectives, in accordance with the comprehensive plan, by having
land developers provide specific amenities in exchange for zoning incentives. The
incentives that may be offered to developers include adjustments to the density of
development, building height, open space, use or other requirements of the underlying
zoning ordinance. These incentives are given in exchange for the developer providing
one or more community benefits, including open space or parks, or cash payments to
the locality in lieu of such amenities.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
37
A local legislature can provide a system of zoning incentives to land developers in
exchange for the provision of community benefits by those developers. In setting up
such a system, the legislature leaves existing zoning provisions in place, but permits
more intensive development of the land in exchange for certain community benefits.
Incentives can be provided to developers who propose the expansion of existing
structures, the adaptive reuse of older buildings, or the redevelopment of brownfield
sites and other distressed parcels in older, developed areas.
6.2.2 Overlay Districts
Overlay districts act as an additional protective layer over existing zoning districts. Their
boundaries typically follow a significant natural resource, making them neither parcelnor district-based. The resource could be wetlands, agricultural land, a scenic area, an
historic area, a shoreline, a mountain ridge or other significant feature. The district is
overlaid on the existing zoning districts of the town, and supplements the zoning
regulations of the underlying districts. This approach allows a town to maintain current
zoning codes while addressing the special needs of particularly sensitive areas.
Overlay districts offer flexible design and solutions to a broad range of land use
problems, are easy to adopt, and maintain a municipality’s home rule while offering an
opportunity for consistent region-wide planning around critical features. Towns have no
additional financial burden in the review process since the procedure remains the same
and may actually experience a savings by minimizing conflicts between interested
parties. Municipalities have greater control over preservation of critical resources while
still allowing appropriate development.
In overlay districts, property owners and developers have a clear understanding of the
town’s expectations and realistic development possibilities at the beginning of the
approval process, before major commitments or expenditures are made. Since
measures to protect the environment are built into the overlay district review process
from the beginning, the SEQRA review process can be more effectively focused,
leading to a quicker and less-costly approval process. Early cooperation can eliminate
the expense of protracted legal battles. Savings can also be realized in infrastructure
costs, based on efficient guidelines.
The community benefits from the protection of significant resources for present and
future enjoyment. Invaluable wildlife and recreation corridors can be protected while
possibly reducing or eliminating the need for state and federal funds to acquire and
manage significant resources.
Agricultural Overlay or Zoning Districts are portions of a municipality where agricultural
uses are permitted as of right and non-farm land uses either are prohibited or are
allowed subject to limitation or condition imposed to protect the business of agriculture.
It is intended to protect the areas where soil and topographic conditions are best
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
38
adapted to the pursuit of agricultural uses and to prevent the mixture of urban and rural
uses which would contribute to the premature termination of agricultural pursuits.
Ag Overlay Districts preserve and protect agricultural lands that are being used for the
commercial production of agricultural commodities. They can restrict the use of the land
to crop production, the raising of animals and to similar and related uses compatible
with agricultural operations. They encourage agricultural uses in places where more
intensive development is not desirable and the compatibility of all agriculture uses with
the surrounding neighborhood. They prohibit land uses that are not compatible with
commercial agricultural operations and minimize conflicts with non-agricultural
neighboring uses.
Historic Overlay. State law allows communities to adopt and enact zoning ordinances
that protect historic and architecturally valuable districts and neighborhoods by
restricting or placing conditions on exterior alterations, additions, demolitions or
relocations of structures in those areas. Studies across the nation have shown that
having local preservation overlay zoning in place not only protects the historic
properties, it protects the value of those properties. Thus owners of historic properties in
these protected districts see the value of their investments increase. See “Historic
Preservation” below.
Scenic Overlay. Old Saratoga’s unique scenic quality and sense of place is derived
from the interrelationship between rural farmland, areas of undeveloped open space,
and its historic hamlets and villages. This rural character, enforced by the maintenance
of its historic settlement patterns and graced with significant natural and historic
resources is the quality that maintains its economic vitality as a visitor attraction, and
also as an attractive place to live and work. Old Saratoga is also an example of the
principle of a working landscape: land actively being farmed, forests being managed as
well as the Champlain and Erie Canalways.
Visual quality and amenities go hand in hand with long term economic development
strategies, and can provide an indication of the stability and desirability of the
community. Thus, in order to continue to be attractive to residents, visitors and
businesses, the municipalities of Old Saratoga must be concerned about its
appearance, physical character and livability. Existing real estate values are in many
ways closely tied to the visual character of a municipality or area, from the value of
residential areas to the desirability of business locations that cater to tourist clientele.
A Scenic Overlay District can encourage reasonable and appropriate development that
is sensitive to aesthetic, environmental, historic and economic concerns. Development
in this district should be compatible with the area’s natural resources, cultural history,
wildlife habitat, and scenic landscapes while promoting tourism and recreational
activities for both residents and visitors to the area. Such a district can be useful in
siting development in a way that is sensitive to the viewsheds of the National Park and
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
39
other historic sites. This will ensure a complete and rewarding experience for visitors,
encouraging them to stay longer and return in the future.
Ridge Protection Overlay. Here the actual district is delineated by the ridge itself.
Allowable uses, and site plan and subdivision standards are then written in the context
of a topographic district. Regulation of the construction of buildings or structures on
mountain ridges can ensure that adequate water supply is available to such
development, that the disposing of sewage will not infringe on the ground water rights
and endanger the health of those persons living at lower elevations, that adequate fire
protection can be made available, and such buildings will not detract from the natural
beauty and historic resources of the ridge.
6.2.3 Planned Development Districts
Planned development districts (PDD) involve site-specific rezoning of parcels to provide
flexibility to developers while maintaining a high degree of local control and providing
certain benefits to the community. PDD ordinances may allow mixed uses, greater
densities, and design flexibility. From the town’s point of view, PDDs may require the
payment of impact fees to the town, provision of infrastructure, or other community
benefits. A PDD may be used as a vehicle to combine the benefits of clustering and
incentive zoning by providing a density bonus in exchange for the preservation of prime
open space or agricultural lands.
6.2.4 Transfer of Development Rights (Appendix C)
As part of a zoning regulation or local law, municipalities can require the transfer of
development rights from sending areas, where conservation is desired, to receiving
areas where denser development can be managed. Specifically allowed in New York
State under Chapter 40 of the Laws of 1989, TDR maintains a property owner’s rights to
develop, yet seeks to have use of some of those rights transferred to more suitable
locations. Below is a discussion of what can be called mandatory TDR programs. For a
discussion of voluntary TDR programs, see section 5.5.
The purpose of a TDR program is to protect the natural, scenic or agricultural qualities
of open lands, to enhance sites and areas of special character or special historical,
cultural, aesthetic or economic interest or value and to enable and encourage flexibility
of design and careful management of land in recognition of land as a basic and valuable
natural resource. An effective TDR program allows a community, whose zoning
ordinance creates a hard to service, spread out development pattern (such as those
requiring 2- to 5-acre lots), to develop in a more cost-effective manner. An effective
TDR program can increase the tax base while minimizing the costs of servicing land
development and preserve threatened conservation areas while allowing owners of land
in that area to be compensated through the sale of some or all of their former
development rights. Because such a program is completely voluntary, less resistance is
encountered.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
40
TDR programs usually establish some method of valuing the development rights that
are to be transferred from the sending to the receiving district. Landowners in sensitive,
sending areas sell the development rights on their land either directly to landowners
wishing to develop in receiving areas or to development rights banks, established by the
municipality, which in turn sell them to landowners in receiving districts.
Purchased credits translate into financial incentives to landowners in receiving areas
such as increased density, faster permit processing, less stringent design review, or tax
breaks to encourage developers and landowners to take advantage of the program.
Sending development to already developed areas with established infrastructure saves
costs for both municipalities and developers. Participation in such a TDR program
would be voluntary and would allow landowners in sending areas to retain the value of
their land while protecting it and the local community to control development and land
preservation within their municipality.
TDR programs can be administered within one municipality or can rely on intermunicipal cooperation. Since resources do not necessarily follow municipal lines, some
of the most successful TDR programs are inter-municipal. One example of a successful
inter-municipal TDR program is New York State’s Central Pine Barrens on Long Island,
Suffolk County. The Towns of Brookhaven, Riverhead and Southampton and the
Suffolk County Department of Health Services cooperate in the selling and redemption
of credits. As of June 2006, 615 parcels in sensitive, sending areas had been
protected.
However, TDR programs are complex to create and manage.
They require
municipalities to perform sophisticated analysis of the impacts of the program in both
sending and receiving districts. As with other regulatory strategies, TDR programs can
raise significant concerns for residents and owners in both sending and receiving
districts. A particularly difficult aspect of designing a TDR program is determining how
to define and value the development rights that are severed from the land and eligible to
be transferred. How development rights are valued and a market for them created will
determine the viability of the TDR program. For this market to function there must be
development pressure in the receiving area resulting in a desire by landowners to
purchase development credits from the sending area. Whether such ratios can be
established and whether sufficient development pressures exist are factors that must be
considered by local leaders who create TDR programs.
An alternative to mandatory and voluntary TDR programs could be thought of as a
partial TDR program. Voluntary TDR programs would be possible because there is no
requirement that zoning be changed in sending district. Similarly, there is no
requirement that any zoning changes in a sending district have to take away all
development rights. For example, when a conservation value could be protected by
reduced densities and clustering the remaining development on unconstrained portions
of the land, some development rights can remain attached to the land rather than
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
41
severed and made transferable. The owners of land in the sending district could be
allowed still to develop but at a lower density than allowed under current regulation and
awarded fewer development credits as a result.
6.2.5 Cluster and Conservation Subdivision (Appendix C)
Cluster Subdivisions allow a developer to vary the dimensional requirements of the
existing zoning in order to “cluster” the residences and create greater areas of open
space. The enabling statute states that overall density of the site may not be greater
than the existing zoning would otherwise allow. Cluster subdivisions typically maximize
development density away from agricultural land, parkland, or the natural resource area
to be preserved such as wetlands or stream corridors. The resultant open space
created may be owned by a homeowners association, dedicated to the town as
parkland, donated to a conservation organization or added to a single private lot with a
conservation easement.
A local law empowers the Planning Board to require submission of both conventional
and cluster lot layouts for new subdivisions. Normally, land is subdivided and
developed in conformance with the dimensional requirements of the local zoning
ordinance. Zoning usually requires that the entire parcel be divided into lots that
conform to minimum lot sizes and that buildings on subdivided lots conform to rigorous
set-back, height and other dimensional requirements. Under cluster development, the
locality permits a land developer to vary these dimensional requirements.
Conservation subdivisions are an enhancement of the cluster development concept that
enables land to be developed while simultaneously preserving community character,
reducing environmental impacts, protecting the rights of property owners, and enabling
a developer to benefit from a high-quality project. A conservation subdivision
accomplishes these goals through a creative design process that identifies primary and
secondary conservation areas. Sensitive areas are set aside from clearing, grading, and
construction. Instead, lot sizes are reduced and the allowed development is arranged to
fit onto the unconstrained land.
6.2.6 Design Guidelines
Design guidelines are both written and graphic advice to use when considering the
appropriateness of new construction and proper siting, relative to scenic values,
viewshed and historic sites. Guidelines may also be created and used on a voluntary
basis, before design review is in place.
Design guidelines can explain, expand, and interpret general design criteria in the local
preservation ordinance. They can also help reinforce the character of a scenic or
historic area while protecting its visual aspects. They can also protect the value of
public and private investment, which might otherwise be threatened by the undesirable
consequences of poorly managed growth.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
42
Design guidelines cannot limit growth, or regulate where growth takes place. Guidelines
address only the visual impact of individual work projects on the character of a location.
Growth itself is a separate issue that must be separately addressed through zoning
ordinances and preservation planning.
6.3
Designate as Critical Environmental Area
Local municipalities can protect areas of exceptional character by designating them as
Critical Environmental Areas (CEAs). Exceptional character can relate to an inherent
geological, hydrological or ecological sensitivity; historic, archeological, social, cultural
or recreational value; large, agriculturally viable areas; naturally and esthetically
attractive settings; or other reasons for sensitivity to development. CEA is a significant
designation under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act that requires
local and state agencies to examine a proposal's environmental impacts and methods of
mitigation prior to committing to, funding, or approving an action. Actions include
projects or physical activities; agency planning and policy making activities; or adoption
of agency rules, regulations and procedures that may affect the environment.
6.4
Historic Preservation
6.4.1 District and Commission
Historic districts are areas in which historic buildings, landscapes and settings are
protected by a local public design review process. Historic districts are more than
attractive places for tourists to visit: they are one of the best ways to keep the look and
feel of a place through a local design review process. Historic districts comprise a
municipality’s significant historic and architectural resources. Inclusion in a historic
district signifies that a property contributes to an ensemble that is worth protecting by
virtue of its historic importance or architectural quality.
Establishing a historic district under Federal law usually involves nominating the district
for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Listing on the National Register
gives official recognition of the district’s significance, and is a prerequisite for receiving
various kinds of Federal benefits. However, National Register listing or eligibility for
listing provides consideration of possible effects on historic properties only when there
is a Federal involvement in an action that may threaten the resources in the district. If
there is no Federal involvement, the Federal designation of the district as historic does
not help to protect the resources.
Creating a historic district under local law can provide more protection to historic
resources than either Federal or State level designation. This is because most land-use
decisions are made under the authority of local law. Local historic districts require
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
43
adoption of a local preservation ordinance with provisions for designating historic
resources, creating a local review board, and writing local design review guidelines.
Local preservation ordinances protect historic properties by officially recognizing historic
areas, buildings and sites as local historic districts and landmarks.
Local historic districts offer many benefits beyond those afforded by either State or
Federal designation. Local historic districts designate historic properties on the basis of
local criteria and local procedures, ensuring nuanced protection that is not overly
burdensome on land owners. Local historic districts protect the investments of property
owners, can stabilize declining areas and can protect property values. Future buyers of
properties within historic districts know that the historic aspects will be protected over a
time. Often, real estate agents will use historic district status as a selling point when
marketing properties.
Local historic districts offer unique educational opportunities, helping to explain the
development of a community as well as the State or the Nation. A local district can
result in a positive economic impact from tourism. A historic district that is well promoted
can be a community's most important attraction leading to a positive economic impact
from tourism. The protection of local historic districts also can enhance business
recruitment potential. Companies often relocate to communities that offer workers a
higher quality of life, which is greatly enhanced by successful local preservation
programs and stable historic districts.
Property owners may be concerned with the burden placed on them by the adoption of
a local preservation ordinance and formation of a local historic district. However, local
decision-making can be responsive to the needs of the specific community, limiting the
burden. Designation does not require that historic properties be open to the public,
restrict sale of the property, require particular improvements or restoration nor limit
interior changes.
It is important that historic districts be self-sustaining to withstand changes in political
will or policy. The community as a whole must support the designation and believe that
the stability afforded is valuable. Historic districts only work if the community agrees.
6.4.2 Designation as a Certified Local Government
The Certified Local Government (CLG) program, a federal initiative established in 1980
to foster partnerships between SHPOs and municipalities, offers communities tools for
advancing local preservation efforts. A city, county, town or village can participate in the
CLG program after the SHPO and the National Park Service certify that the local
government has enacted preservation legislation and appointed a review commission
that meets state and federal standards. In New York State, the SHPO works with
approximately forty CLGs offering training opportunities, technical assistance, legal
advice, and grants that support community preservation activities. Between 1997 and
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
44
2001, the SHPO awarded close to sixty grants to eligible CLGs, totaling more than
$500,000
6.4.3 Listing in the National or State Historic Register
Listing in the National Register honors a property or district by recognizing its
importance to its community, State, or the Nation, based on national criteria. As with
local districts, owners of properties on the register are not obligated to open their
properties to the public. Private property owners can do anything they wish with their
property, provided that no Federal license, permit, or funding is involved. However,
owners of listed properties may be able to obtain Federal historic preservation funding,
both pre-development planning and repair, and be eligible for Federal investment tax
credits for rehabilitation.
Similarly, there is a New York State Register process through which a historic district
can be recognized as significant under State law. However, this State law designation
will have benefits and limitations that parallel a Federal designation. The best
combination is local historic district designation as well as federal National Register
designation. While local designation creates an opportunity for local design review,
federal designation provides additional potential for federal grant-in-aid funds and tax
credits.
Model Ordinances can be found in Appendix D.
6.5
New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA)
New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is powerful tool that is
often underutilized by municipalities. SEQRA requires the sponsoring or approving
governmental body to consider environmental impacts equally with social and economic
factors during discretionary decision-making, and to identify and mitigate the significant
environmental impacts of the activity it is proposing or permitting. Beyond the plainlanguage meaning, environmental impacts also include those to aesthetic, agricultural,
archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or
neighborhood character. This includes impacts on historic sites or on the viewshed of
historic sites.
All discretionary decisions of an agency to approve, fund or directly undertake an action
which may affect the environment are subject to review under SEQR, except those
predetermined not to have a detrimental environmental effect (Type II actions). All other
actions may be subject to SEQRA review. SEQRA review may result in project
modifications or in project denial if the adverse environmental impacts are overriding
and adequate mitigation or alternatives are not available.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
45
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
46
7.0
Implementation Strategy
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
7.1
Regional Implementation
7.1.1 Historic Saratoga-Washington on the Hudson Partnership
The recommendations in this Plan could be a key element to the Historic SaratogaWashington on the Hudson Partnership’s stewardship plan for the Old Saratoga Region.
While the geographic and historic scope of the Partnership is greater than that of this
Plan, the Plan’s scope is an excellent core for the Partnership’s revolutionary war focus.
The Plan is also an excellent model upon which to build the additional plans needed to
truly protect all the historic and other assets in the Region.
7.1.2 Presentation to Town, Zoning and Planning Boards of Each Partner
Municipality
Because municipal bodies are required to consider all information reasonably related to
the effects of a proposed project or action when making SEQRA determinations, it is
important that the Plan be clearly explained to all those affected by it. Only through
careful understanding by all decision-making bodies will the objectives of the Plan be
met. Saratoga PLAN and its partners should obtain necessary funding to make
presentations to all decision-making bodies in the study area.
7.1.3 Strategic Partnerships to Protect Valuable Resources
Because the resources that plan seeks to protect do not follow political boundaries, it is
important for the municipalities within the study are to work together to smooth the pace
and execution of protection. Similar to the partnerships between the Towns of Saratoga
and Northumberland in creating an Open Space Plan; the Saratoga National Historical
Park and the Town of Easton in creating a 1971 viewshed analysis; the Town of
Saratoga, the Village of Schuylerville, and the Fort Hardy Park Commission in creating
the Fort Hardy Park Master Plan; Saratoga PLAN, the Town of Saratoga, Saratoga
County and Open Space Institute to protect the Ritson Property; New York State, Open
Space Institute and SNHP to protect Burgoyne’s Sword Surrender site on the Germain
property; and others, strategic partnerships should be created to protect shared
resources.
The Quality Communities program represents New York State’s commitment to working
with local government leaders and community organizations to find smart, innovative
solutions to strengthen the economy, environment, and improve the quality of the
State’s communities. QC grants seek to strengthen intergovernmental and community
partnerships to improve the delivery of services to communities; encourage sustainable
economic development; conserve open space and other critical environmental
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
47
resources; revitalize downtowns and community centers; and enhance and encourage
the use of technology, all of which support the goals of this plan.
The Villages of Schuylerville and Victory should consider a Quality Communities grant
to study the possible provision of shared services including protection of historic
resources and creation of tourism and recreational opportunities.
Because the Villages of Schuylerville and Victory provide the historic business and
population centers to the Town of Saratoga, a Transfer of Development Rights program
encompassing all three municipalities could be considered. Agreements surrounding
tax revenue and expenditures would be necessary in addition to the agreements
surrounding sending and receiving areas. The Pine Barrens on Long Island is an
excellent example of such an inter-municipal TDR program. Development is directed
away from the shared, sensitive area of the Pine Barrens and directed to population
centers representing the historic settlement patterns.
The Saratoga National Historical Park (SNHP) has a long history of working
collaboratively with local and county municipalities, the State and community
organizations and should continue that tradition. Some potential collaborations and
actions could require expansion of its enabling legislation, which could be considered
when appropriate, but many joint protection actions would not. Specific suggestions
concerning specific municipalities are considered under that municipality’s section,
below.
7.1.4 County Geographic Information Systems Programs.
Saratoga County
Saratoga County should consider the addition of the composite overlay data generated
in this Plan to its GIS programs, with access to further information available on request.
Saratoga County should also post or link to land use regulations, comprehensive plans
and open space plans for each of the towns and villages, as well as this Plan, the Old
Saratoga on the Hudson Waterfront Revitalization Plan and other regional plans.
Washington County
Washington County should consider making its GIS data available online and, once
online, the County should consider adding data from this Plan. Washington County
should also post or link to land use regulations, comprehensive plans and open space
plans for each of the towns and villages, as well as this Plan, the Old Saratoga on the
Hudson Waterfront Revitalization Plan and other regional plans.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
48
7.2
Local Implementation
Because the study area includes municipalities with diverse land use and open space
planning histories and tools in place, the implementation approach will have to be
tailored by each. The combination of voluntary preservation, regulatory and incentive
tools outlined in this plan will depend heavily on current land use practices, public
sentiment and input, and financial and staffing constraints faced by each municipality.
In the prioritization of historic sites, viewsheds and scenic areas for preservation, one
important criterion considered was the potential threat level of development of the
parcel in question. One important aspect of that threat assessment was the presence
or absence of zoning regulations protecting the parcel. The municipalities within the
study have the option to use zoning controls to restrict the amount, location and design
of development. However, doing so requires that each municipality carefully define the
public purposes and public needs while being careful to allow property in private
ownership to retain reasonable economic value and benefit of the land.
Changes to current land use regulations should involve extensive citizen and land
owner involvement, to ensure that rights are protected, all voices are heard, and support
can be garnered. Sensitivity to landowner and citizen concerns is especially important
in the study area in light of other overarching planning processes and New York’s status
as a home rule state.
7.2.1 All Municipalities
To ensure consideration of all aspect of the Plan in decisions related to land use, each
partner Town could consider formally adopting the Plan.
To ensure an engaged and educated public, each Town should provide all land use
regulations and policies, including comprehensive plans, open space plans, zoning or
other land use regulations, land use maps, waterfront revitalization plans, recreational
plans, resource inventories, resource management plans and other land use and
resource protection plans, as widely as possible. One option would be to post them on
the internet. Zoning regulations published through General Codes can be posted on
General Codes’ E-codes website as well as on Town and Village websites. In those
municipalities without the web capabilities necessary to allow this information to be
accessed online, investigation and assessment of possible expansion of web
capabilities.
Since not all citizens have access to computerized information or the knowledge
necessary to access such information, it is important that each municipality provide
information in multiple formats. To ensure citizens are not lost to the “digital divide” (the
gap between those who are able to access computerized information and those who are
not), copies of all plans, policies and inventories should also be available at libraries,
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
49
Town and Village halls and other public places to ensure access beyond typical
business hours.
7.2.2 Town of Easton
The Town of Easton is already undertaking the most important step in any preservation
plan, regardless of the resource to be preserved: updating its Comprehensive Plan.
Since the Comprehensive Plan is the blueprint for the town, it will be important to
include historic site, viewshed and scenic area identification and prioritization in the
discussion and planning processes. It should also determine the need for an open
space plan.
Although the Town of Easton does not have zoning regulations, per se, it does have
many land use regulations in place. The Comprehensive Plan should detail what types
of voluntary preservation approaches the town could undertake and what additional
regulatory and incentive tools the town could enact. During this discussion, Easton may
wish to consider revision to its current subdivision regulation to include a provision for
conservation or cluster subdivisions. The Town already has limitations on the number
of subdivisions allowable on a parcel, and those limitations run with the land and not the
owner. Clustering could be incorporated, perhaps with the use of incentives.
Important viewshed resources include Easton’s ridgelines – one immediately to the East
of the Hudson River and the ridgeline including Willard Mountain. Easton does not
allow development on slopes greater than 15%, which already affords some protection
to these ridgelines. For those slopes that are highly visible but perhaps somewhat less
than 15% slope, Easton could consider an addition to its design guidelines that would
assess sensitive site placement for new development or consider a ridgeline overlay.
Additionally, Easton completed a mapping project of its historic homes. Historic districts
and design guidelines could provide added protection to the historic sites identified in
this study as well as those identified in the Town’s mapping effort.
Easton’s extensive active farmland is scenically and economically valuable to the region
and contributes to the security of the Nation’s food source. Easton contains the highest
concentration of prime soils, commercial farms and conserved farmland in the region.
Easton’s Critical Environmental Area designation of its entire agricultural district adds
protection to the Town’s subdivision limitations. To further protect the working
landscapes, the Town could consider either a voluntary or regulatory transfer of
development rights program. Development could be directed to the existing hamlet,
residential, commercial and industrial land use overlays, taking further pressure off the
working agricultural lands. Also scenically and contextually important to the Battles is
the Battenkill. The segment of the Battenkill from the Hudson River to Easton’s border
with the Village of Greenwich already has a Critical Environmental Area designation.
Easton could consider a buffer along the length of the Battenkill, to ensure proper
setback for allowable development.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
50
Easton is fortunate to have a well-regarded and effective land trust in Washington
County – Agricultural Stewardship Association (ASA) and a long history of voluntary
preservation efforts. ASA has been able to leverage through Washington County’s
Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) Program, State and Federal governments, and
private donations to protect more than 2,360 acres in Easton and OSI has protected
another 950 acres. Easton could investigate funding a locally-controlled PDR program
that could stand on its own or be used to augment County and private efforts.
Easton also boasts many highly-ranked historical sites that can be protected in a variety
of ways, depending on desired use. General Fellows Troops Fording Point is not only
historically significant to the Battles, it also retains much of its original form (high
integrity) and is in close proximity to other significant sites. If public access was
desired, the site could be purchased and protected by either the town or a non-profit
interested in interpreting the site. Other sites that are more significant for the context of
the Battles they bring to the area, such as the Site of the Sarles Ferry, could be
protected through a purchased or donated easement. Willard Mountain, which does not
rank highly on connectivity to other sites but is important for context, could be protected
along with the rest of the ridge by a ridge protection overlay that assists developers in
identifying sensitive siting.
7.2.3 Town of Greenwich
In addition to its comprehensive plan, Greenwich has recently adopted its draft zoning
ordinance. The proposed agricultural district affords some protection to agricultural
lands significant to the viewshed and scenic values of the area by discouraging uses
that convert productive farmland. However, because the district encompasses so much
of the town, it allows for many uses by special permit. It might be useful to break down
this district farther or to limit the businesses allowed to those directly related to farming.
A well-designed TDR program, either voluntary or regulatory, could help direct
development away from productive agricultural lands to the town’s historic hamlets
more effectively, protecting farms from “rural sprawl” resulting from low density rural
development.
In addition to proposed cluster zoning, Hudson River and Battenkill setbacks and
Hamlet/Mixed Use District, Greenwich could consider an historic district or overlay for
the areas surrounding the Hudson and Battenkill, including the Pontoon Bridge site. For
those significant historic sites and those warranting further investigation, the town could,
singly or in concert with neighborhood groups and non-profits, consider purchase for
public access and protection. For example, the Thomson-Clarks Mills Residents
Committee for a Heritage Park advocates use of the former Georgia Pacific site for a
heritage park. There is some evidence that the Great War Trail continued across the
Georgia Pacific parcel and that General Burgoyne followed the trail on his way to the
Battles. Furnival’s Battery, which does retain some of its original structure, could be
protected by a purchased or donated easement that allows continued agricultural use
but restricts disturbance to the remains.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
51
7.2.4 Town of Northumberland
The Town of Northumberland already has many tools in place to protect areas
significant the area’s viewshed and scenic resources. Although recommended in the
comprehensive plan, Northumberland does not yet have a historic preservation
committee. Because Northumberland is rich in historic sites outside the scope of this
study, such a committee in conjunction with historic district overlays would have farreaching benefit.
Since farming is an important industry in Northumberland, the town could protect
agriculture, and, by extension, viewshed and scenic resources through purchase of
development rights, either on its own, through Saratoga County’s Famland and Open
Space Preservation Program or through partnerships with nonprofits. Northumberland
could also consider a TDR program, either voluntary or mandatory, to direct growth
away from farms and open space to the hamlets of Gansvoort, Bacon Hill and
Northumberland.
7.2.5 Town of Saratoga
The Town of Saratoga recently updated its comprehensive plan and is currently
reviewing its zoning ordinance. In those deliberations, the town could consider any of
the regulatory or incentive tools outlined in Section 6. In its current incarnation, the
Town’s zoning ordinances include provisions for conservation subdivision and site plan
review. Continuation of the Wetlands Conservancy District and Agricultural District can
preserve some of the important viewshed and scenic resources. Expansion of overlay
districts to include environmental protection overlay, scenic overlay or historical overlay
districts would supplement the protections already afforded. A ridge overlay, in
conjunction with the Town’s current prohibition of development on steep slopes of
greater than 15%, could protect the highly valuable viewshed along the Hudson River.
A PDR program, independently or in conjunction with the County program, would
protect scenic open and agricultural resources.
Purchase or donation of conservation easements, either by the town or a non-profit
could protect scenic resources as well. For example, protection of Saratoga Apple
would protect the Yaeger’s camp site, a portion of Morgan’s Line as well as viewshed
and scenic resources. Near its border with Stillwater, the Town already has a significant
block of protected land including the National Veterans Cemetery, and farms protected
with conservation easements (Hanehan and Ritson). Protection of significant viewshed
and scenic resources surrounding this block of protected land, as identified on the
Composite Analysis Map, particularly since it is in close proximity to the SNHP, would
have a much greater effect than if the resources were isolated. Also in this area, Wilbur
Road is historic in that it was the site of troop movements. A scenic or rural road
overlay could protect the approach to the SNHP.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
52
Although the Town does not have design guidelines per se, site plan and planning
board review does take into consideration the archeologically sensitive areas mapped in
the comprehensive plan. Set backs, lot sizes, siting and archeology requirements are
all more stringent in these sensitive areas. The Town could consider in its deliberations
the adoption of specific design guidelines for these areas, ensuring consistent treatment
of historic resources.
7.2.6 Village of Schuylerville
Because the Village of Schuylerville is extremely rich in historic sites and crucial to the
viewshed of adjoining and abutting historic sites, it should consider creating a local
historic district and review committee. State and Federal recognition could follow local
recognition, increasing the protection afforded to traditional, historic population and
business centers.
The Assembly Area is a highly significant site that the Village already controls. The
execution of the Fort Hardy Park Plan would provide important opportunities for
interpretation of this and other close significant sites. The British Artillery Camp, the
Earthworks at the War Council Site, and the Convention Signing site are significant sites
that could be protected through purchase or easement by strategic partnerships.
7.2.7 Town of Stillwater
A large portion of the area in the Town of Stillwater that is also within the study area is
already protected as the Saratoga National Historical Park. Stillwater and its partners
have successfully protected additional farmland, lying between the SNHP and the
Hudson River, through conservation easements. Additional abutting land is currently
zoned rural residential or low density residential and is in an agriculture district. The
town or SNHP could consider purchase of easements on the additional abutting land.
For those lots with historic remains, Stillwater could, through its cluster subdivision,
planned development district and site plan review, steer development away from
sensitive areas on the parcel, require sensitive design and siting and require protection
of those areas. Additionally, as recommended in its comprehensive plan, the Town
could create a buffer district around the SNHP, with specific design guidelines for
parcels abutting the Park.
Morgan’s Flank Defense (Munger Farm) retains little integrity of the original farm, but is
an active cow pasture, which is contextually consistent. An agricultural easement,
donated or purchased, could afford the necessary protection.
The American
Fortifications in Stillwater still retain a few sections of breastworks. The parcel
containing these fortifications is currently zoned rural residential, with a minimum lot
size of 2 acres. Design guidelines and site plan review could require sensitive siting, to
ensure the breastworks are avoided during development.
However, since the
breastworks are so close to the parcel’s boundary with the SNHP, the Park could
consider purchase of a subdivision that includes the breastworks. Swampy Place, while
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
53
historically significant with some retained integrity, is already afforded some protection
as a designated wetlands. If the owner were interested, the Town could investigate
adding the Ezekiel Ensign House to either the State or National Historic Registers.
7.2.8 Village of Victory
As with the Village of Schuylerville, the Village of Victory is extremely rich in historic
sites and crucial to the viewshed of adjoining and abutting historic sites. The Village
should consider creating a local historic district and review committee. State and
Federal recognition could follow local recognition, increasing the protection afforded to
traditional, historic population and business centers.
Because many of the Region’s important historic sites do not follow political boundaries,
many continue from one Village to the other. The Villages could consider sharing an
historic district, committee and designation, limiting the resources needed for
management.
Of the parcels that flank the Dutch Church remains, one contains two billboards and one
is vacant. These parcels might be an opportunity for the Village protect significant sites
including the remains and a portion of Gates Line and provide interpretation. Brookfield
Power, the owner of the abutting property that flanks the Fish Creek, is already creating
a Fish Creek trail, which would add interest to these sites.
7.3
Funding of Implementation
Funding for planning and implementation can come from a variety of sources including
County, State and Federal grants, and corporate and non-profit partners. Potential
partners, funding and assistance sources are outlined generally in the following section.
Municipalities can also self-fund initiatives through a number of mechanisms. Although
self-funded, assistance for the various approaches can be found among the partners
that follow in Section 9.
7.3.1 Payments in lieu of amenities
For municipalities with incentive zoning ordinances, a cash payment can be substituted
by the developer for the amenity normally required by the regulation. Payments in lieu
of amenities have the benefit of being an additional funding stream that does not impact
existing funding streams needed for current service provision. Such payments do
require existing zoning that allows for substitution of a monetary contribution in place of
a required public benefit or amenity.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
54
7.3.2 Bonding
Bonds can raise significant funds, however bonds taking long than five years to repay
require a referendum. Bonds have an advantage over appropriations in that the money
they generate is “up front.” However, bonding can be a time-consuming endeavor.
7.3.3 Real Estate Transfer Tax
Funding may also be procured by levying a tax on the sale of real estate in the
community. Because there is no general state enabling legislation that permits
municipalities to impose such a tax, a municipality must first seek passage of specific
enabling legislation from the state legislature pursuant to Municipal Home Rule Law.
Once approved by the state legislature, the transfer tax must then be approved by local
voters through a local referendum. Because of the required steps, a real estate transfer
tax can be complicated. It has the added benefit, however, of being an additional
funding stream that does not impact existing funding streams needed for current
provision of service.
7.3.4 Annual and Multiyear Appropriations
Municipalities can use local property taxes to protect sensitive properties as part of local
annual budgeting process. This method has the advantage of being simple, requiring
no bond. The time required to accrue necessary funds can be a disadvantage if time is
of the essence.
7.3.5 Tax Abatement
Municipalities can choose to offer land owners a tax abatement, whereby a landowner
or developer is excused from all or a part of a tax obligation in return for a concession
on land use. While not exactly a financing mechanism, tax abatement can provide an
incentive to protect properties of interest. A tax abatement can linked to a term
conservation easement. Although not a permanent solution, the term can buy a
community time to explore permanent options. Tax abatements can also be linked to
farm or historic structures to give an incentive to improve existing farms and increase
the possibility of permanence through financial viability.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
55
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
56
8.0
Recommended Actions
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Historic Saratoga-Washington on the Hudson Partnership
•
•
•
•
•
Adopt Plan as a key element in its stewardship plan
Model additional plans needed to truly protect all the historic and other assets in
the Region on this Plan
Provide technical and funding support to municipalities, non-profits and other
organizations for efforts related to any of the scenic, viewshed or historic
resources identified in this Plan
Encourage and coordinate inter-municipal and inter-organizational efforts to
advance this Plan
Partner with existing organizations to coordinate agri-tourism and heritage
tourism efforts throughout the Old Saratoga Region
Saratoga P.L.A.N. and Partners
•
•
•
Obtain necessary funding to present this Plan to all decision making bodies in
included municipalities
Present this Plan to all decision making bodies in included municipalities
Forge strategic partnerships to protect resources
Saratoga National Historical Park
•
•
Forge strategic partnerships to protect resources
Investigate purchase of a potential subdivision that includes the breastworks of
the American Fortifications in Stillwater
Saratoga County
•
•
•
Add the composite overlay data generated in this Plan to its GIS programs, with
access to further information available on request
Post or link to land use regulations, comprehensive plans and open space plans
for each of the towns and villages
Post or link to this Plan, the Old Saratoga on the Hudson Waterfront
Revitalization Plan and other regional plans.
Washington County
•
•
Add the composite overlay data generated in this Plan to its GIS programs, with
access to further information available on request
Post or link to land use regulations, comprehensive plans and open space plans
for each of the towns and villages
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
57
•
Post or link to this Plan, the Old Saratoga on the Hudson Waterfront
Revitalization Plan and other regional plans.
Inter-municipal Partnerships
•
•
•
Strategic partnerships between municipalities in the study area, with other
municipal bodies, and with non-profit and other organizations should be created
to protect shared resources
The Villages of Schuylerville and Victory should consider a Quality Communities
grant to study the possible provision of shared services including protection of
historic resources and creation of tourism and recreational opportunities
The Town of Saratoga and the Villages of Schuylerville and Victory should
investigate a joint Transfer of Development Rights program
All Municipalities Individually
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Adopt this Plan
All decision-making municipal bodies should consider this Plan as it relates to the
effects of a proposed project or action when making SEQRA or other
determinations
Consider a Local Historic District
Consider a Historic Review Committee
Consider the voluntary and regulatory preservation strategies presented here
when drafting, implementing or revising any land use regulation
Forge strategic partnerships to protect resources
Provide all land use regulations and policies, including comprehensive plans,
open space plans, zoning or other land use regulations, land use maps,
waterfront revitalization plans, recreational plans, resource inventories, resource
management plans and other land use and resource protection plans, as widely
as possible
o Investigation and assessment of possible expansion of web capabilities,
as needed
o Post to municipality’s websites
o Post on General Codes’ E-codes website
o Copies of all plans, policies and inventories available at libraries, Town
and Village halls and other public places to ensure access beyond typical
business hours
Investigate those potential historic sites that are not supported by primary
authorities but that have significant secondary authority support
Town of Easton
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection:
o Willard Mountain
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
58
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
o Fording Point of General Fellows Troops
o General Fellows Battery
o East Bank River – British Tete-du-Point
o East Bank River – American Tete-du-Point
o General Fellows Camp
o DeRidder Ferry
o Battenkill
o Sarles Ferry
o Becker Farm and Ferry
o Ridgelines
o Eastern farmland
Complete Comprehensive Plan update
o Include historic site, viewshed and scenic area identification and
prioritization
o Determine the need for an open space plan
o Detail what types of voluntary preservation approaches, regulatory and
incentive tools the town could enact
Revise subdivision regulation to include a provision for conservation or cluster
subdivisions
Adopt ridge protection measures
o Design guidelines for sensitive siting
o Ridgeline overlay
Create historic districts and design guidelines
Investigate a voluntary or regulatory transfer of development rights program
Create a buffer along the length of the Battenkill
Investigate funding a locally-controlled PDR program
General Fellows Troops Fording Point and other historically significant with high
integrity
o Consider purchase by either the town or a non-profit interested in
interpreting the site
Site of the Sarles Ferry and other sites significant for the context of the Battles
o Protection through a purchased or donated easement
Willard Mountain can be protected along with the rest of the ridge by a ridge
protection overlay that assists developers in identifying sensitive siting
Town of Greenwich
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection:
o Great War Trail continuation
o Pontoon Bridge
o Furnival’s Battery
o Land between the Hudson River and the Battenkill
Sites requiring further investigation:
o Georgia Pacific site
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
59
•
•
•
•
•
•
Refine the agricultural district to limit the businesses allowed to those directly
related to farming
Investigate a voluntary or regulatory transfer of development rights program
Create historic districts and design guidelines for the areas surrounding the
Hudson and Battenkill, including the Pontoon Bridge site
Inventory the Georgia Pacific site for evidence of the continuation of the Great
War Trail and its use by General Burgoyne
For those significant historic sites and those warranting further investigation, the
town could, singly or in concert with neighborhood groups and non-profits,
consider purchase for public access and protection
Furnival’s Battery can be protected by a purchased or donated easement that
allows continued agricultural use but restricts disturbance to the remains
Town of Northumberland
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection or
further protection:
o Stark’s Knob
o Morgan’s Line
o March of British Troops
Create a historic preservation committee
Create historic district overlays for the sites included in this study and those
outside the boundaries of this study
Investigate a voluntary or regulatory transfer of development rights program
Investigate funding a locally-controlled PDR program
Access Saratoga County’s PDR program
Town of Saratoga
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection and
interpretation:
o Yaegers Camp
o Gates Floating Bridge
o American Earthworks attributes to Learned
o Dovegat Home site
o High Ground British Encampment
o Gates Headquarters
o British Camp (North End)
o Continuation of Morgan’s Line from Northumberland
o Wilbur Road
o March of British Troops
Consider all regulatory and incentive zoning tools outlined in Section 6 during its
review of its zoning regulations
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
60
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Expand overlay districts to include environmental protection overlay, scenic
overlay or historical overlay
Create a ridge overlay, in conjunction with the Town’s current prohibition of
development on steep slopes of greater than 15%, to protect the highly valuable
viewshed along the Hudson River
Investigate funding a locally-controlled PDR program
Access Saratoga County’s PDR program
Protection of Saratoga Apple through conservation easement would protect the
Yaeger’s camp site, a portion of Morgan’s Line as well as viewshed and scenic
resources
Protection of significant viewshed and scenic resources surrounding the block of
protected land that includes the National Veterans Cemetery and a number of
farms, as identified on the Composite Analysis Map, would have a much greater
effect than if the resources were isolated.
Create a scenic or rural road overlay to protect Wilbur Road
Create specific design guidelines for the archeologically sensitive areas mapped
in the comprehensive plan
Investigate, with the Villages of Victory and Schuylerville the creation of an intermunicipal TDR program
Village of Schuylerville
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection and
interpretation:
o Mouth of Fish Creek
o Assembly Area
o Field of Grounded Arms
o Site of Convention Signing
o British Artillery Camp
o Burgoyne’s War Council site, including earthworks
o Revolutionary War graves
Apply for a Quality Communities grant with the Village of Victory for the
protection of historic resources and creation of tourism and recreational
opportunities
Investigate, with the Village of Victory and the Town of Saratoga, the creation of
an inter-municipal TDR program
Create a local historic district and review committee
Execution of the Fort Hardy Park Plan
Investigate strategic partnerships that could protect the British Artillery Camp, the
Earthworks at the War Council Site, and the Convention Signing site
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
61
Town of Stillwater
•
•
•
•
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection and
interpretation:
o Morgan’s Flank Defense (the Munger Farm)
o American Fortifications
o Swampy Place
o Ezekiel Ensign Home Site
o Wright’s Ferry Site
o Areas significant to the viewshed included in parcels that are contiguous
with the SNHP
Cooperatively purchase of easements on unprotected land abutting the SNHP,
such as Morgan’s Flank Defense (Munger Farm), that retain little integrity of the
original farm, but which are contextually consistent as farmland
For those lots with historic remains, such as the parcel with the American
Fortifications, steer development away from sensitive areas on the parcel,
require sensitive design and siting and require protection of those areas through
cluster subdivision, planned development district and site plan review
For those lots with historic remains, such as the parcel with the American
Fortifications, the area with the remains could be subdivided and purchased by
SNHP
Create a buffer district around the SNHP, with specific design guidelines for
parcels abutting the Park
Investigate adding the Ezekiel Ensign House to either the State or National
Historic Registers, if the owner is willing
Village of Victory
•
•
•
•
Historic, viewshed, scenic and contextual sites to consider for protection and
interpretation:
o Victory Woods (slated to be open to the public by SNHP)
o British Camp
o American Earthworks remains
o General Burgoyne’s Fortified Camp
o Gate’s Line
o Dutch Church
o Victory’s East side is significant to the viewshed of the SNHP and other
historical sites
Apply for a Quality Communities grant with the Village of Schuylerville for the
protection of historic resources and creation of tourism and recreational
opportunities
Investigate, with the Village of Schuylerville and the Town of Saratoga the
creation of an inter-municipal TDR program
Create a local historic district and review committee
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
62
•
•
Investigate purchase of the parcels that flank the Dutch Church remains for
protection and interpretation of the remains as well as protection of the viewshed
Connect to the Fish Creek trail that is being created by Brookfield Power and
Saratoga PLAN.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
63
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
64
9.0
Potential Partners and Funding and Assistance Sources
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
9.1
County Government
9.1.1 Saratoga County Farmland/Open Space Preservation Program
Saratoga County Planning Department
50 West High Street
Ballston Spa, NY 12020
518-884-4705
www.co.saratoga.ny.us
RFP generally available: April/May
Application deadline generally: July
9.1.2 Washington County Purchase of Development Rights Program
Administered by: The Agricultural Stewardship Association
28R Main Street
Greenwich, NY 12834
Phone: (518) 692-7285
E-mail: asa@agstewardship.org
Application deadline generally: April 1
9.2
State Government
9.2.1 New York State Historic Preservation Office
Peebles Island, PO Box 189
Waterford, New York 12188-0189
(518) 237-8643
http://nysparks.state.ny.us/shpo
• Communities may apply for matching grants from the SHPO to:
o Create or update design guidelines
o develop or revise a preservation ordinance
• SHPO offers training for members and staff of historic preservation
commissions and architectural review boards and responds to special
information requests.
• Local preservation ordinances and historic districts can lead to a
municipality becoming a Certified Local Government (CLG).
o CLG status makes a municipality eligible to compete for funds
allocated to SHPO specifically for CLGs.
o Tax incentives for the certified rehabilitation of income-producing
properties listed in the National Register
o Tax incentives for charitable contributions for conservation
purposes
9.2.2 New York State Department of State
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
65
41 State Street
Albany, NY 12231-0001
Division of Coastal Resources
Telephone Number: 518-474-6000
Fax Number: 518-473-2464
http://www.nyswaterfronts.com
• The New York State Environmental Protection Fund - grants to eligible
municipalities for planning, design, feasibility studies, and construction
projects that advance preparation or implementation of a Local Waterfront
Revitalization Programs.
• The Brownfield Opportunity Areas Program - provides municipalities and
community based organizations with assistance to complete area-wide
approaches to brownfields redevelopment planning.
• The Quality Communities Grant Program - assists Counties, Cities,
Towns, Villages, Indian Tribes/Nations, Local Public Authorities, Public
Benefit Corporations, and, in some circumstances, Not-for-Profits with
planning efforts to: encourage community growth, improve community
centers, promote intermunicipal growth, enhance mountain communities,
preserve open space, and more.
Division of Local Government Services
Telephone: (518) 473-3355
Fax: (518) 474-6572
localgov@dos.state.ny.us
• Training for planning and zoning boards
9.2.3 The New York State Canal Corporation
Administrative Headquarters
200 Southern Blvd., P.O. Box 189
Albany, NY 12201-0189
(518) 436-2700
www.canals.state.ny.us/welcome
Can provide assistance related to redevelopment of the Canal System and the
communities located within its Corridor. The Canal Corporation created the Canal
Revitalization Program to foster economic development in municipalities along
the Canal, and provides information about a wide variety of State and federal
grants (www.nyscanalbusiness.com) and direct assistance programs for Canal
development strategies.
9.2.4 New York State Housing Trust Fund Corporation
• Office for Small Cities
4 Empire State Plaza, Ste. 600
Albany, New York 12223-1401
Phone: 518-474-2057
Fax: 518-474-5247
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
66
•
www.nysmallcities.com
o Community Development Block Grant Program
ƒ Eligible applicants: Cities, towns and villages having a
population under 50,000
ƒ To revitalize neighborhoods, expand affordable housing and
economic opportunities and or improve community facilities
and services
New York Main Street Program
Hampton Plaza
38-40 State Street
Albany, NY 12207
1-866-275-3427
www.nymainstreet.org
New York Main Street was created to
o Provide funding for Main Street and downtown revitalization efforts
o Serve as a resource to communities looking for financial and
technical assistance to revitalize their Main Street
o Eligible applicants:
ƒ Not-for-profit community-based organizations
ƒ Business improvement districts
ƒ Other entities incorporated pursuant to the Not-for-Profit
Corporation Law
o Eligible areas:
ƒ Majority of the residents of the target area earn 80% or less
than the Area's Median Income
o Eligible activities:
ƒ Façade Renovation - Matching grants of up to $10,000 per
building, but not to exceed 50% of total cost, can be
provided to owners for façade renovations
ƒ Building Renovation - Matching grants of up to $50,000 per
building, but not to exceed 50% of total cost, can be
provided to owners for renovation of commercial/civic space
on first floor and residential units above
ƒ Downtown Anchors - Matching grants of up to $100,000 per
building, but not exceeding 25% of project cost, can be
provided to owners to help establish or expand cultural or
business anchors that are identified in a local plan as key to
the revitalization effort. Developments that incorporate
residential units on the upper floors will receive priority for
funding
ƒ Streetscape Enhancement - Grants of up to $25,000 for
programs to plant trees and other landscaping, install street
furniture and trash cans, provide appropriate signs in
accordance with a local signage plan, and other appurtenant
activities. Street lighting may be eligible for funding where
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
67
applicants can satisfy all feasibility issues. A streetscape
enhancement grant will only be awarded if it is ancillary to a
program providing building renovation or downtown anchor
grants
o Most recent deadline: March 2007
9.2.5 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
625 Broadway, 10th Floor
Albany, NY 12233-1080
(518) 402-9240
www.dec.state.ny.us
Hudson River Estuary Program
• Eligible recipients include municipalities and not-for-profit organizations
• 75% matching funds
• Types of projects are eligible for funding
Open Space: Natural Areas and Scenic Resources - planning,
inventory and acquisition
o Community-based Habitat Conservation and Stewardship
o Watershed Planning and Implementation
o Hudson River Access: fishing, boating, swimming, hunting, hiking,
or river watching
• Current Deadline: June 29, 2007
Environmental Restoration Program
• Provides grants to municipalities to reimburse up to 90 percent of on-site
eligible costs and 100% of off-site eligible costs for site investigation and
remediation activities.
• Once remediated, the property may then be reused for commercial,
industrial, residential or public use
• The purpose must be to investigate or remediate hazardous substances or
petroleum on the property
• Applications accepted continually until funding is exhausted
Technical Assistance Grants
• Citizen participation tool available to eligible community groups to increase
public awareness and understanding of remedial activities taking place in
their community
• Eligible community groups may apply to receive grants for up to $50,000
per eligible site
• There is no matching contribution required on the part of the grant
recipient
• Applications continuously accepted
9.2.6 New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
Saratoga-Capital District Region
19 Roosevelt Drive
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
68
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
(518) 584-2000
www.nysparks.com
Parks Program
o A matching grant program for the acquisition or development of
parks and recreational facilities for projects to preserve, rehabilitate
or restore lands, waters or structures for park, recreation or
conservation purposes. Funds may be awarded to municipalities or
not-for-profits with an ownership interest, for indoor or outdoor
projects and must reflect the priorities established in the NY
Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP).
Historic Preservation Program
o A matching grant program to improve, protect, preserve,
rehabilitate or restore properties listed on the National or State
Registers of Historic Places. Funds are available to municipalities
or not-for-profits with an ownership interest.
Heritage Areas Program
o A matching grant program for projects to preserve, rehabilitate or
restore lands, waters or structures, identified in a management plan
approved by the Commissioner. Projects must fall within a New
York State Designated Heritage Area.
Acquisition
o A matching grant program for the acquisition of a permanent
easement or fee title to lands, waters or structures for use by all
segments of the population for park, recreation, conservation or
preservation purposes. To be used for all three program areas
where acquisition is of more importance than development.
Land and Water Conservation Fund Program
o A matching grant program for the acquisition, development and/or
rehabilitation of outdoor park and recreation facilities. Funds are
available to municipal public agencies and Indian tribal
governments. Funded projects must reflect the priorities
established in SCORP and be available to the general public.
Source of funds: The National Park Service.
Snowmobile Trail Grant Program
o A grant program that allocates funds to local governments that
engage in the development and maintenance of snowmobile trails
designated as part of the State Snowmobile Trail System. The
authorization for the program is found in Article 27 of NY Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation Law. Funding is allocated on
a pro-rated basis.
Recreational Trails Program
o A matching grant program for the acquisition, development,
rehabilitation and maintenance of trails and trail-related projects.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
69
Funds are available to non-profit organizations, municipal, state
and federal agencies, Indian tribal governments and other public
agencies and authorities. Funded projects must be identified in, or
further a specific goal of, the SCORP and must be available to the
general public. Source of funds: Federal Highway Administration.
9.2.7 New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Division of Agriculture Protection and Development
10B Airline Drive
Albany, NY 12235
(518) 457-5606
www.agmkt.state.ny.us
• Farmland Protection Implementation Grants
• Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plans
9.2.8 New York State Council on the Arts
175 Varick Street
New York, NY 10014
Tel: (800) 510-0021
www.nysca.org
Design and Planning Studies and Adaptive Use Studies
• Funding is available for any nonprofit organization or local governmental
agency in New York State
• To engage the services of an architect, or planning, design, or historic
preservation professional for a wide variety of planning and design studies
• Most recent deadline: March 2007
9.2.9 New York State Legislature (Member Items)
Another possible source of public funding is the New York State Legislature.
Requests for financial assistance should be sent to the State Senator and/or the
Member of Assembly representing the district in which the property/project is
located. There is an application process -- contact your State Legislators
(Assembly and Senate) for more information.
9.2.10 Historic Saratoga-Washington on the Hudson Partnership
The Partnership was recently formed by New York State Legislature
due to the tireless efforts of New York State Assembly members Roy
McDonald and Steven Englebright. This visionary organization will
address collaborative agriculture and open space protection, tourism
development, revitalization efforts, recreational development and
protection of natural, cultural and historic heritage. The organization
is charged with creating a stewardship plan to protect the unique
historic and natural significance as a primary birthplace of the United
States of America. Beginning with Native Americans in pre-colonial
times to early European trading posts, the French and Indian War,
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
70
the American Revolution, and the 19th century commercial and
industrial development related to the building of the Erie and
Champlain Canals, the area is distinguished by its scenic and natural
features, agricultural uses and historic Hudson River towns.
Contact Information: While the Partnership is still in its formation, contact
Assembly member Roy McDonald, (518) 455-3727 or (518) 747-7098.
9.2.11 Empire State Development Corporation
30 South Pearl Street
Albany, NY 12245
1-800-782-8369
E-mail: esd@empire.state.ny.us
Regional Office – Capitol Region
Hedley Park Place
433 River Street, Suite 1003
1st Floor
Troy, NY 12180
Phone: 518-270-1130
Fax: 518-270-1141
Email: nys-capitaldist@empire.state.ny.us
•
I Love New York
www.iloveny.com
(800) CALL-NYS
(518) 474-4116
•
Empire Zone - Saratoga County
Shelby Schneider
Saratoga Economic Development Corporation
28 Clinton Street
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
(518) 587-0945
(518) 587-5855
sschneider@saratogaedc.com
•
Empire Zone – Washington County
Mac Sanders
Washington County Development Corporation
Washington County Local County Office Building
383 Broadway
Ft. Edward , NY 12828
(518) 746-2295
(518) 746-2293
msanders@co.washington.ny.us
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
71
9.3
Federal Government
9.3.1 National Park Service www.nps.gov
• Heritage Preservation Services
National Park Service
1849 C Street, NW (2255)
Washington, DC 20240
- Helps citizens and communities identify, evaluate, protect and
preserve historic properties for future generations
- Provides a broad range of products and services, financial
assistance and incentives, educational guidance, and technical
information
o American Battlefield Protection Program
ƒ Promotes the preservation of significant historic
battlefields associated with wars on American soil
ƒ Protects battlefields and sites associated with armed
conflicts
ƒ Assists in planning for the preservation, management,
and interpretation of battlefields and associated sites
ƒ Focuses primarily on land use, cultural resource and
site management planning, and public education
o Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives
ƒ Foster private sector rehabilitation of historic buildings
and promotes economic revitalization
ƒ Available for buildings that are National Historic
Landmarks, that are listed in the National Register,
and that contribute to National Register Historic
Districts and certain local historic districts
o Historic Landscape Initiative
ƒ Promotes responsible preservation practices that
protect designed landscapes such as parks and
gardens, as well as vernacular historic landscapes
such as farms and industrial sites
o Historic Preservation Planning Program
ƒ Develops national policy related to historic
preservation planning
ƒ Develops and delivers technical assistance and
guidance in historic preservation planning to SHPOs,
federal agencies, tribes, and local communities
o Technical Preservation Services
ƒ Provides the tools and information necessary to take
effective measures to protect and preserve historic
buildings
• Save America’s Treasures program
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
72
Save America's Treasures grants are available for preservation
and/or conservation work on nationally significant intellectual and
cultural artifacts and nationally significant historic structures and
sites.
- Grants are awarded to Federal, state, local, and tribal government
entities, and non-profit organizations through a competitive
matching-grant program
- Administered by the National Park Service in partnership with the
National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the
Humanities, the Institute of Museum and Library Services and the
President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities
Preserve America matching-grant program
- Funding to designated Preserve America Communities to support
preservation efforts through heritage tourism, education and historic
preservation planning
- Grants are available to assist local economies find self-sustaining
ways to promote their cultural resources through heritage tourism.
- Designated Preserve America Communities eligible
-
•
•
National Register of Historic Places
1201 Eye St., NW
8th Floor (MS 2280)
Washington, DC 20005
Main telephone: 202-354-2213
- Makes a property eligible for pre-development planning grants
(such as plans and specs) and also "bricks and mortar" repair
grants.
- Owners of properties listed in the National Register may be eligible
for a 20% investment tax credit for the certified rehabilitation of
income-producing certified historic structures such as commercial,
industrial, or rental residential buildings.
9.3.2 National Endowment for the Humanities
• Challenge Grants
Office of Challenge Grants
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Room 420
Washington, DC 20506
202-606-8309
challenge@neh.gov
- Awards are made to museums, public libraries, colleges, research
institutions, historical societies and historic sites, public television
and radio stations, universities, scholarly associations, state
humanities councils, and other nonprofit entities.
- Activities supported:
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
73
•
o Maintenance of facilities
o Faculty and staff development
o Acquisitions
o Preservation/conservation programs.
We the People Initiative
1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Room 511
Washington, DC 20506
(202) 606-8337
wethepeople@neh.gov
- Enhances the teaching and understanding of American history
through grants to scholars, teachers, filmmakers, museums,
libraries, and other individuals and institutions
- Disseminates knowledge of American history through exhibitions,
public programs, and partnerships with the state humanities
councils
9.3.3 United State Department of Agriculture
• Natural Resources Conservation Service
14th and Independence Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20250
Greenwich Service Center
2530 State Route 40
Greenwich, NY 12834-9627
(518) 692-9940
(518) 692-9942 Fax
Ballston Spa Service Center
Municipal Center, 50 W High St
Ballston Spa, NY 12020-0600
(518) 885-6300
(518) 884-9101 Fax
- Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program
ƒ Provides matching funds to help purchase development rights to
keep productive farm and ranchland in agricultural uses
ƒ Recipients: State, tribal, or local governments and nongovernmental organizations that have existing farmland
protection programs
ƒ Marilyn Stephenson, New York FRPP Manager
Phone: (518) 431-4110; marilyn.stephenson@ny.usda.gov
- Resource Conservation and Development Program
ƒ Provides technical assistance to local communities through
designated USDA areas led by RC&D Councils
ƒ Helps complete project designs and get projects underway by
assisting the council to locate the necessary resources
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
74
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
RC&D activities address land conservation, water management,
community development, and land management issues, such
as:
o Improving opportunities for recreation and tourism
o Protecting agricultural land, as appropriate, from
conversion to other uses
o Creating, improving, and protecting fish and wildlife
habitat
- Rivers, Trails and Conservation Assistance
Assistance to nonprofit organizations, community groups, Tribes
or Tribal governments, and local or state government agencies
Project examples:
o Link parks, schoolyards, open spaces and residential
areas with safe, quiet greenways
o Restore significant cultural and historic assets
o Recycle abandoned railways into trails that link
neighborhoods and communities
o Preserve open spaces for future generations
9.3.4 United States Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
http://www.bywaysonline.org/grants/application
Byway’s Lead Organization: Lakes to Locks Passages, Inc.
814 Bridge Road
Crown Point, NY 12928
(518) 597-9660
•
Consult the byway’s lead organization or lead individual to determine
support for your project concept. Identify potential project sponsors.
•
Categories of eligible projects:
o State and Tribal Programs
o Corridor Management Plan
o Safety Improvements
o Byway Facilities
o Access to Recreation
o Resource Protection
o Interpretive Information
o Marketing Program
9.4
Non-profits
Agricultural Stewardship Associates
28R Main Street
Greenwich, NY 12834
Phone: (518) 692-7285
E-mail: asa@agstewardship.org
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
75
•
•
•
•
As a land trust, ASA conserves farmland and permanently protects the
land available for agriculture in the Washington County Region.
ASA has helped landowners conserve over 7.050 acres of agricultural and
forest land by placing those lands under conservation easement. These
lands have been protected primarily through the donation of development
rights (DDR) and purchase of development rights (PDR), in cooperation
with the Washington County Agricultural and Farmland Protection Board,
the State of New York and the United States Department of Agriculture.
ASA works in cooperation with municipalities and county Agricultural and
Farmland Protection Boards, the State of New York, the United States and
private organizations.
The ongoing commitment to monitor, defend, and enforce the easement
ensures protection in perpetuity.
Battenkill Conservancy
P.O. Box 327
Cambridge, NY 12816
Phone: 518.677.2545
E-mail: bc@battenkillconservancy.net
•
As a land trust, the Battenkill Conservancy can hold conservation
easements and professionally monitor, defend and steward protected
land.
•
The Conservancy works with municipalities, state agencies and other nonprofit organizations to preserve and enhance the quality of the watershed
and to guide growth and development along the river and within the
watershed.
•
The Conservancy has assisted towns during the comprehensive planning.
•
The Conservancy monitors the water quality of the Battenkill.
The Conservation Fund National Office
1655 N. Fort Myer Drive, Suite 1300
Arlington, Virginia 22209-2156
Phone: 703-525-6300
Fax: 703-525-4610
Email: postmaster@conservationfund.org
•
Land & Water Conservation Services
o Land Acquisition
o Land Advisory
o Property Disposition
o Conservation Financing
o Mitigation & Restoration
o Strategic Conservation
•
Conservation Financing
Revolving loan fund, nonprofits only
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
76
•
Land trust loan fund, nonprofits only
The Kodak American Greenways Awards Program
RFP available generally: March
Application Deadline generally: June
Small grants to stimulate the planning and design of greenways
Eligible: Local, regional, or statewide nonprofit organizations.
Although public agencies may also apply, community organizations
will receive preference.
Land Trust Alliance
The New York State Conservation Partnership Program
Land Trust Alliance Northeast Program
112 Spring Street
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
(518) 587-0774
Fax: (518) 587-9586
Contact: Ethan Winter; ewinter@lta.org
http://www.lta.org/resources/nyscpp.htm
• Land trusts eligible for funding
• At least a 1:1 match ratio with awards historically ranging from $1,000 to
$46,000
• Land Conservation Transaction Grant
• Conservation Catalyst Grant
• Deadline generally: January
The National Trust for Historic Preservation
Northeast Regional Office
7 Faneuil Hall Marketplace
Boston, MA 02109
617 523 0885
www.nthp.org
This national NFP membership organization provides a wide range of
preservation services across the country, including grant programs.
•
The John E. Streb Preservation Services Fund for New York
o Financial assistance for consultant services, feasibility studies, and
education.
o The applicant must be a NFP organization or municipality.
o The average grant award is $1,000 to $1,500.
o Application deadlines are February 1 and October 1.
•
The National Preservation Loan Fund
o Establish or expand local and statewide preservation revolving
funds, to acquire and/or rehabilitate historic buildings, sites, and
districts, and to preserve National Historic Landmarks.
o The National Trust's office in Washington, D.C. administers the loan
fund.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
77
•
•
•
The Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation
o Support to NFP organizations and governmental agencies
o Individuals and for-profit businesses may apply for funding only if
the project for which funding is requested involves a National
Historic Landmark.
o Eligible activities and projects include consultant services, the
production of educational materials, and conference or workshop
costs.
o Grants generally range from $2,500 to $8,000.
o The application deadline is February 1.
The Cynthia Wood Mitchell Fund for Historic Interiors
o Aids in the preservation, restoration, and interpretation of historic
interiors
o Applicants eligible to receive grant awards include NFP
organizations, government agencies, for profit businesses, and
individuals
o Typically, grants range from $5,000 to $25,000
o Eligible activities include hiring professional design services,
obtaining professional advice to strengthen management
capabilities, production of print and video communications
materials, sponsoring conferences and workshops, and developing
innovative education programs.
o The application deadline is February 1.
The Daniel K. Thorne Intervention Fund
o Provides immediate assistance for urgent preservation needs, such
as structural analysis, feasibility studies, and critical outreach and
education.
Open Space Institute
1350 Broadway, Suite 201
New York, NY 10018-7799
Phone: (212) 290-8200
Fax: (212) 244-3441
www.osiny.org
•
The mission of the Open Space Institute is to protect scenic, natural and
historic landscapes to ensure public enjoyment, conserve habitats and
sustain community character.
•
OSI achieves its goals through land acquisition, conservation easements,
special loan programs, and creative partnerships.
Loan Program: Established non-profit land conservation organizations and land
trusts
Public entities are not eligible, although applications are welcome from their nonprofit partners
Rolling application acceptance
Marc Hunt, mhunt@osiny.org, (828-278-0134).
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
78
Grant Program: The Northern Forest Protection Fund (NFPF) is a matching
capital fund created to support the permanent protection of large forest
landscapes in northern New York
Pre-proposals are accepted throughout the year from land trusts
Peter Howell, 212-290-8200, phowell@osiny.org
Preservation League of New York State
44 Central Avenue
Albany, NY 12206
(518) 462-5658
•
Preserve New York Grant Program
o In association with the New York State Council on the Arts
o Applicant must be a not-for-profit group with tax-exempt status or a
unit of local government
o Grants are likely to range between $3,000 and $10,000
o Eligible activities:
ƒ Historic Structure Reports
ƒ Historic Landscape Reports
ƒ Cultural Resource Surveys
o Most recent deadline: May 2007
Saratoga PLAN
112 Spring Street, Room 202
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
(518) 587-5554
www.saratogaplan.org
•
Saratoga PLAN is the land trust of the Saratoga Region, directly protecting
and managing land and water resources through conservation easements
and outright acquisition of property. Saratoga PLAN has preserved 2,772
acres to date.
•
Saratoga PLAN is an advocate for smart growth, encouraging
comprehensive regional planning to preserve and enhance our quality of
life.
•
Saratoga PLAN is a collaborative conservation partner, working closely
with landowners, developers, government agencies and community
organizations throughout the region.
•
Saratoga PLAN provides community planning support to local and county
agencies.
9.5
Other Sources
Tourism Cares’ Worldwide Grant Program
585 Washington St.
Canton, MA 02021
Tel: 781-821-5990
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
79
Fax: 781-821-8949
info@tourismcares.org
www.tourismcares.org
•
Charitable grants to worthy tourism-related non-profit organizations
•
Capital improvements that serve to protect, restore, or conserve sites of
exceptional cultural, historic, or natural significance
•
The education of local host communities and the traveling public about
conservation and preservation of sites of exceptional cultural, historical, or
natural significance
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
80
10.0 Bibliography
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
American Farmland Trust, Agricultural and Farmland Protection for New York, 1993,
AFT, Northampton, MA.
Agricultural Stewardship Association, Why Saving Farmland Is Critical Now,
http://www.agstewardship.org.
Agricultural Stewardship Association, Farmland Conservation: A Landowner's Guide,
http://www.agstewardship.org.
Behan Planning Associates, LLC, Green Infrastructure Plan for Saratoga County,
November 21, 2006.
Capital District Regional Planning Commission, The, Capital District Population
Projections, Revised May 2004, http://www.cdrpc.org/.
Church, David and John Myers, Shawangunk Ridge Conservation and Design
Guidebook, The Catskill Center for Conservation and Development, Inc., 1993.
Cornell Cooperative Extension, Washington & Saratoga Agriculture Economic
Development Program (AEDP) Farm Directory, 2006.
Crompton, John L., Parks and Economic Development, 2001, American Planning
Association, Chicago, IL.
Daniels, Katherine & David Sampson, Open Space for Tomorrow: A Capital District
Sprawl and Open Space Strategy, Open Space Institute, 2005.
Dodson Associates, Ltd., Visualizing Conservation Development in Saratoga County,
July 2006.
Easton, Town of, Critical Environmental Area Designation and Map, 1984.
Easton, Town of, Development Guidelines, 1990.
Easton, Town of, Mapping Project, 2005.
Economic Research Associates, Economic Analysis of the Saratoga Race Course,
Saratoga County Industrial Development Agency, August 23, 2006.
Greenwich, Town of, Draft Zoning Ordinance, 2006.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
81
Kennedy, Frances H. and Douglas R. Porter, The Conservation Fund, Dollar$ and
Sense of Battlefield Preservation – The Economic Benefits of Protecting Civil War
Battlefields, The Preservation Press, Washington, DC, 1994.
Koke, Richard J., The Field of Grounded Arms at Schuylerville (Old Saratoga), New
York, Saratoga National Park, May 2, 1947.
Land Use Law Center, Cluster Development, Local Leader's Guide, Series III, Issue 6,
Pace Law School.
Land Use Law Center, Incentive Zoning, Local Leader's Guide, Series III, Issue 7, Pace
Law School.
Land Use Law Center, Overlay Zoning, Local Leader's Guide, Series III, Issue 2, Pace
Law School.
Land Use Law Center, Planning and Land Use Regulation, Local Leader's Guide,
Series I, Issue I, Pace Law School.
Land Use Law Center, Transfer of Development Rights, Local Leader's Guide, Series
III, Issue 8, Pace Law School.
Land Use Law Center, Zoning Ordinance and Its Amendment, Local Leader's Guide,
Series I, Issue 2, Pace Law School.
Murphy, Michael and Joseph Stinson, Incentive Zoning, Land Use Law Center, Pace
Law School, 1996.
National Park Service, Story of the Battles, Archives, http://www.nps.gov/archive/sara/sbatles.htm.
National Park Service, Saratoga National Historical Park General Management Plan,
US Department of the Interior, 2004.
National Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of
Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes, US
Department of the Interior, 1996.
National Park Service, Charles A. Birnbaum, ASLA, Protecting Cultural Landscapes –
Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes, US Department of the
Interior, Preservation Briefs 36.
National Park Service, The Battle of Saratoga September 19, 1777 – A Brief History,
Official Guide to the Saratoga National Historical Park, US Department of the Interior.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
82
National Park Service, Working on the Past in Local Historic Districts,
www.cr.nps.gov/hps/workingonthepast.
National Park Service, Sophia Kelly, Developing and Implementing Archeological Site
Stewardship Programs, US Department of the Interior, Preservation Briefs 22.
National Park Service, Historic Preservation Tax Incentives, US Department of the
Interior, Technical Preservation Series.
New York Codes, Rules and Regulations, Chapter 6, Part 617 State Environmental
Quality Review (SEQR) (6 NYCRR 617).
New York State Department of Labor, Division of Research and Statistics, Employed,
Unemployed, and Rate of Unemployment by Place of Residence for New York State
and Major Labor Areas, December 2006, http://www.labor.state.ny.us.
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, New York State
Historic Preservation Plan 2002-2006.
Nolon, John R., Comprehensive Land Use Planning - Learning How and Where to
Grow, Land Use Law Center, Pace Law School, 1993.
Northumberland, Town of, Comprehensive Land Use Plan, 2003.
Old Saratoga on the Hudson Waterfront Revitalization Program, Final Draft Report,
February 2007.
Pendall, Rolf, Sprawl Without Growth: The Upstate Paradox, Center on Urban and
Metropolitan Policy, October 2003, Brookings Institute, Washington, DC.
Pruetz, Rick, Beyond Takings and Giving Saving Natural Areas, Farmland and Historic
Landmarks with Transfer of Development Rights and Density Transfer Charges, Arje
Press, 2003.
Saratoga, County of, Green Infrastructure Plan, November, 2006.
Saratoga, Town of, Comprehensive Land Use Plan, 2002.
Saratoga National Historical Park, Cultural Landscape Inventory Saratoga Monument,
Existing Conditions and Analysis, 2002.
Saratoga National Historical Park, Cultural Landscape Inventory Schuyler House, 2002.
Saratoga National Historical Park, Cultural Landscape Report Saratoga Battlefield
Volume 1, Site History, Existing Conditions and Analysis, September 2002.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
83
Southampton, Town of, Southampton Tomorrow: Comprehensive Plan Update, 1996.
Stillwater, Town and Village of, Joint Comprehensive Plan, 2006.
Stokes, Samuel N., et al., Saving America’s Countryside, A Guide to Rural
Conservation, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD., 1989.
Sustainable Communities Network, Principles of Smart Growth - Preserve Open Space,
Farmland, Natural Beauty and Critical Environmental Areas, http://www.sustainable.org.
Sylvester, Nathaniel Bartlett, History of Saratoga County, New York, 1878. Transcribed
from the original text and html prepared by Bill Carr. Copyright 1999, 2000 Bill Carr &
Heritage Hunters of Saratoga County.
www.rootsweb.com/~nysarato/Sylvester/contents.html.
US Bureau of the Census; Census 2000; Census 1990.
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, New York Agricultural Statistics County
Estimate Reports, www.nass.usda.gov/ny, March 5, 2007.
Battles of Saratoga Preservation and Viewshed Protection Plan
Saratoga P.L.A.N. December 2007
84